In search of a community . . .

Inspired by the Sentinel's Blogpost about whether the internet based communities can survive / be resurrected in the era of Facebook -

Clichéd though this will sound - I put it down to the "markets versus community" tension. Community and the relationships it fosters is a basic human need. In as much as community has been part of hominid evolution for hundreds of thousands if not millions of years (since the time of the baboon troupe), community is probably a defining element in the human environment of evolutionary adaptation (EEA). Human social interactions with and in its community are thus foundational to human nature - defining its distinction from monkey nature.

 

Industrialisation brought about migration to cities with nuclear families (disrupting kinship groups) and dense populations (too large to aggregate into a new community) - stable "village" community groups of the pre-industrial era were disrupted. No alternative to the stable - durable community of old emerged. Congregational religions - through church / parish based aggregations may have provided an alternative in some measure - but they too were no where as durable.

 

In the last 15-20 years - the internet provided the chance to aggregate interest based communities by wiping out geographical distance. It is debatable to what extent this could simulate the close-contact of pre-industrial communities. But internet communities have the advantage of avoiding the unpleasant side-effects of cheek-by-jowl community living.

 

Social networks tap into this very human need for community. But driven by the market dynamic of the network effect - where the larger the network the greater the benefit to those deriving revenues from the network - social networks soon grew even larger than post-industrial cities. Too large to aggregate as a community.

 

Nevertheless, social networks are by definition malleable, and shold allow for enough internal mobility for interest based communities to aggregate within the gigantic superstrtucture. So where as in an industrial city - say Shanghai - it would be difficult for a community of say dim-sum lovers to get together and decide to live together in a single city block; such aggregations are much easier within social networks. This is where I think Google+'s idea of "Circles" has significant potential.

 

The biggest downside of internet based communities can be their very freedom - where village-communities had natural barriers to exit, forcing people to adjust, accomodate and resolve differences - in online communities people can just up and away at the click of a button. Valuable social skills that develop through growing and living in communities may never be learnt!

Once upon a time . . .

. . . children's fiction consisted of tales of faries, elves, brownies and well behaved little boys and girls who got rewarded with goodies and treats. They had all sorts of fun and adventures, along with their friendly unhuman friends - they were courageous anmd truthful (in most of the cases) and saved the world - like the heroes that they were.

Sounds a lot like the collected works of Enid Blyton, doesn't it?

And then there was Roald Dahl, I suppose, at some level, it was his work that made a little-bit of the dark side acceptable in literature for children. I suppose that has now reached a certain level of fruition with the best selling works of avada kedavra and other interesting adventures such as those of Percy Jackson and his Olympic escapades. (Yes, literature for kids is something I read and enjoy for somewhat similar reasons as I enjoy watching Tom and Jerry cartoons!!)

When I first read the immortal works of J K Rowling, a little after she started Rowling in money . . ., (yeah bad pun, I know, but I could not resist that one . . ), I noticed certain parallels between her works and those of other fictioners who had consumed much ink before her. I remember thinking, when I first read "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone"", that it felt like a cocktail of Enid Blyton's bedtime fairy tales, the Addam's Family chronicles and the big daddy of the fantasy genre - Tolkein's Lord of the Rings.

And yes, I am a big fan of LotR, I can't help intoning in deep slow tones -

Ash nazg durbatulûk, ash nazg gimbatul,Ash nazg thrakatulûk agh burzum-ishi krimpatul.

I cannot but feel a sense of awe and respect at Tolkein's creative genius. And traces of Sauron are unmistakable in Voldemort.

The horcruxes though are interesting - as a kid I recollect hearing tales where wicked wizards or ogres hide their 'life'in some other object so that they are unkillable by conventional means, so the concerned Prince Charming has to deploy unconventional tactics to rescue the distressing damsels.

The parallels between the burden Harry and his friends experience when wearing the locket horcrux, and the burden of the Ring bearer are also unmistakable. A pity poor Frodo (or more likely the practical minded Samwise) did not think of sticking a Basilisk fang into the One Ring instead of trudging all the way to Mount Doom!!

Anyway, I will now conclude this meaningless rambling deconstrution, and resume my routine vacation programming!!

Cheers all!!

And the Bankers lived happily ever after . . .

No, this is not a Wall Street saga of government bailouts and astronomical bonuses. It is a dull review of a work of fiction.

IF GOD WAS A BANKER by Ravi Subramanian Category: Fiction Number of pages: 264 Published in: 05/01/2007 Available in: Paperbound ISBN_PB: 9788129111470

Perhaps the title should have been "And the Bankers lived happily ever after". Perhaps the title derives from the Indian proclivity for apotheosis of the saintly and honest and the virtuous protagonist is the 'God' referred to in the title. Apart from this tenuous rationale the narrative does not connect with the title.
As such the plot is fairly common place, and a similar tale could have been told in the setting of any multi-national corporation. Why banking?
Then again, where as the narrative is well paced, the characterisation is weak. A more skilled novelist might have been able to make the characters more true to life. As such they lack depth and complexity. The polarisation of the two main protagonists as paragons of virtue and weakness respectively is too simplistically black and white. So where as the basic idea of the novel has potential, the way it has developed doesn't do it justice. In the hands of a Jeffrey Archer or a Sidney Sheldon - better still a Jhumpa Lahiri or a Vikram Sheth - this novel could have been memorable work of modern fiction, perhaps even a master-piece.
Yet for a first novel and from the pen of one who is not a professional writer - this could have been worse. In fact, I see in it the seeds of a fairly decent Bollywood flick! Ram Gopal Verma, Madhur Bhandarkar, Ashutosh Gowarikar - are you people listening?

On what ‘marriage’ is and whether it can be ‘gay’

Much debate, often fiery,  on “gay marriage” is being waged on various fronts – in courts, the media and of course on the ubiquitous ‘internet’. It is a surprisingly emotive issue for parties on either side of the debate and for many the very concept of marriage is at stake – and that is indeed a very grave matter. Personally, my views on the matter have tended to be ambivalent. However a dispassionate un-emotive analysis of the issue and its wider implications are essential before any reasoned stand can be arrived at. And one of the most useful techniques of doing so is to touch base with the first principles – what is a marriage – what is the purpose of a marriage? One can then look to conceptualise what a ‘gay marriage’ would constitute – and try to answer how it would differ from a ‘traditional marriage’, and whether a ‘gay marriage’ can serve and enhance, or at least, not impede, any useful purpose that ‘traditional marriage’ serves.

So then to start – what is a marriage?

The description as provided by the Encyclopaedia Britannica is quoted in the following paragraph. I have underlined some of the key attributes which need to be looked at closely. Highlighted in red is the qualifier which we are trying to examine. The description also enumerates some of the basic functions of marriage which will be useful for our evaluation.

“a legally and socially sanctioned union, usually between a man and a woman, that is regulated by laws, rules, customs, beliefs, and attitudes that prescribe the rights and duties of the partners and accords status to their offspring (if any). The universality of marriage within different societies and cultures is attributed to the many basic social and personal functions for which it provides structure, such as sexual gratification and regulation, division of labour between the sexes, economic production and consumption, and satisfaction of personal needs for affection, status, and companionship; perhaps its strongest function concerns procreation, the care of children and their education and socialization, and regulation of lines of descent.”

marriage." Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Ultimate Reference Suite.  Chicago: Encyclopædia Britannica, 2010.

To look at the attributes of marriage then.

It is a legally and socially sanctioned union –  In most modern jurisdictions, marriage has definite legal articulation as a consensual ‘contract’ between two adult individuals which imparts them certain legal rights with regards to each other and with regards to their off-spring. Typically the marriage contract is can only be dissolved through a legal procedure – divorce. The legal sanction of marriage crucially extends into a legal basis for inheritance – for the partners as well as for their off-spring. The social sanction for marriage is wider in scope. Traditionally in human communities where ‘family’ has been the basic unit – a marriage constitutes the creation of a new family unit as well as an extension of the existing extended family unit. Often the social sanction of a marriage derives from the kinship ties within and without the extended family. The legal and social elements than translate into regulations and prescriptions.

1. regulated by laws, rules, customs, beliefs and attitudes – the contractual nature of marriage is touched upon above. The rules, customs, beliefs and attitudes are spectacularly diverse – but often the absolute core consists of rules concerning incest taboo. Then there are rules concerning endogamy – the social, economic and / or ethnic ‘in-group’ within which it is ‘permissible’ to marry, and exogamy – the marrying outside a specified group – often a kinship group, and thus in many ways an extension of the incest taboo. Attitudes of course are often driven by social and cultural expectations – but at individual levels can be surprisingly subtle and mutable.
2. prescribe the rights and duties of the partners and accords status to their offspring – the rights and duties of the partners are often extra-legal and pre-legal in the sense that they been in force and in practice before formal legal frameworks evolved or were legislated. As a matter of fact some of the core ‘rights and duties’ of the partners and the ‘status’ accorded to off-spring are out-right pre-historic – pre-dating the advent of civilisation.

This pre-historic attribute if often left out of definitions of marriage, but that may be on account of the singular arrogance of our species in trying to place itself at the pinnacle of the phylogenetic scheme of which we are a part. Marriage after all is at its core pair-bonding – a partnership between a mating couple that lasts at least through one mating season, serving primarily in the cooperative rearing of young. In humans it is observed to, and as recorded in literate communities, has been known to, last a life-time.

The neuro-harmonal, and hence ultimately genetic, basis of pair-bonding has been indicated in several studies; which seem to hint at three kinds or levels of ‘love’ that might be involved in pair-bonding.

1. lust or sexual passion (independent of personality of a partner) – the most basic and observable in the mating behaviour of many non human animals as well
2. romance or limerence (dependent upon a particular personality), – tending to short term attachment (few months to few years), and usually also has a strong element of sexual desire (lust or sexual passion)
3. attachment (pair-bonding over extended time) – tending to long term, even life-long attachment; often seen to commence as limerence,

Limerence tends to be more common amongst adolescents and young adults as compared to mature adults – there may also be a gender difference with men being more likely to enter into short term pair-bonds as compared to women. This is significant when we consider that the other large terrestrial primates – the gorillas and chimpanzees – do not form pair bonds and the dominant male in the troupe tends to monopolise coitus with ovulating females. These great apes also display much higher levels of sexual dimorphism.

However mate selection by the human female seems to value not just dominance and aggressiveness in males, but the proclivity to form longer term attachments – which implies much higher levels of participation in parental care and child-rearing (protection and nourishment) – seems to have been positively selected for. Two interesting clues seem to reinforce this conclusion – the prevalence of male-child bonding (affection) which is largely absent in the other great apes is one. The other is the quirk of hidden ovulation in the human female – which has the consequence of necessitating more frequent coitus to achieve insemination. This is significant because coitus is known to stimulate activity in the dopamine system and oxytocin and arginine vasopressin systems – which reinforce mate preference (preference accorded to the mate over other males/females); hidden ovulation could therefore significantly serve to encourage pair-bonding.

As such, long term pair-bonding as outlined above seems to have the distinct characteristics of the male-female union described as marriage in humans. But this type of human pair bonding, with the associated man-child bonding has the ancillary effect of the father knowing the identity of his child and the child knowing the relatives of its father. Pair-bonding in context of the ‘social group’ of humans leads to the identification and establishment of kin-ship ties. From which derives the status of the off-spring and promotes kin selection. The distinctly social attributes and functions of ‘marriage’ start to emerge from mate selection and pair-bonding.

What then are we to make of the ‘gay marriage’?

Let us begin with pair-bonding. As humans, gays should ordinarily be quite capable of forging long term pair-bonds. The increased tendency amongst human males to engage in short-term (limerence) pair-bonds may tend to make marriages amongst gay men less durable – but then increasingly ‘durability’ is no longer a commonly observed attribute of traditional marriages either. Furthermore, the if legal sanction were to be provided to gay men to ‘marry’ and start a ‘family’ through adoption – the man-child bond, and the mate-preference induced by frequent coitus afforded by the marital alcove could have a salubrious effect on the durability of such a union. Legalising gay-marriage then may dampen promiscuity amongst gay men, which in turn will have its own benefits in terms of potentially lesser incidence of sexually transmitted diseases.

Legal sanction for gay marriages should also be relatively straightforward to establish – legal templates are already evolved to govern traditional marriages and to a large extent the same can be employed. Contractual obligations around marriage, the rights and responsibilities of the gay spouses, nuptial agreements, joint ownership of property, inheritance and right of ‘survivor’ benefits in the event of bereavement, status and inheritance for any adopted children, and tricky as it may seem, gay divorce and alimony-palimony laws, can all be framed with only slight modification to those applicable for traditional marriages.

It is when we start talking about social sanction for gay marriages – with all the trappings of custom, tradition, religion, beliefs and attitudes – that things become rather tricky. Social recognition for gay marriages has to evolve and emerge gradually – it can neither be legislated nor brought about by fiat. Questions such as – will a gay couple be welcomed to a neighbourhood, will they be accepted in the PTA at the schools of their adoptive children, can a lesbian take her partner along for a with-spouses party at work (well she can, but will she and her spouse be welcome and accepted), will a family be comfortable leaving their young boys in the care of a gay teenaged baby-sitter (yes, paedophilia is not known to correlate highly with gayness, but we are talking feelings not fact here), the answers to all these questions will wary greatly from person to person and situation to situation. And yet, I think (though I have no data to establish it), for a while at least, even in some of the most ‘liberal’ societies, the answers to these questions will be distinctly more uncomfortable for gay couples than for traditional couples. May be, at differential rates in different societies, the critical mass amongst the general population will give the ‘liberal’ answer to the above questions – but till such time, gay marriages cannot be said to be socially sanctioned, for whatever that is worth.

Religion, tradition, custom and culture – deeply intertwined as they all tend to be – will probably be the most formidable obstacle; these are the most difficult to change. My own religious tradition – the Hindu family of religious traditions – are so deeply enmeshed in ritual, tradition, custom and culture, I find it impossible to visualise a gay Hindu marriage. What mantras should the priest chant when consecrating it? Which of the two ‘fathers-in-laws’ will perform the gift of the bride (kānya-dān)? Will acquiring a gay ‘bride’ afford the gay Hindu the right of yajna? Who amongst the gay couple will perform the role of the ‘lady of the house’ and place yoghurt on the palm of the deity prior to immersion – visarjan? Will the gay husband wear the double sacred-thread while the gay wife wears none? Who amongst the gay couple will anoint his husband’s fore-head with vermillion and perform ārti on Diwāli? Who amongst the gay couple will place the nose-gay and gold ring he is wearing for Lakshmi Pooja? Trivial and anachronistic these questions will seem to many – yet they are not irrelevant because they are illustrative of the gap that needs to be bridged; that may perhaps never be bridged.

In terms of the functions of marriage, it is fairly straightforward to check which ones are discharged effectively by a ‘gay marriage’

1. sexual gratification – I expect a gay marriage should ordinarily be able to secure this for the persons concerned
2. regulation, division of labour between the sexes – this can be tricky, where in traditional marriage the woman tends to be the nurturer and care giver and in many societies the home maker while the man is the protector and in many societies the sole bread-winner; however these distinctions are increasingly blurred in most ‘modern’ marriages, which then becomes an easier target for gay marriages to achieve
3. economic production and consumption – difficult to visualise how a gay marriage would differ from a traditional one on this matter – except perhaps to the extent 2 above is not clarified
4. satisfaction of personal needs for affection, status, and companionship; – again like 1 above, gay marriages should probably achieve this at least as well as traditional ones
5. procreation, – this then is the clearest short coming, yes a gay couple can adopt, but unlike a traditional marriage, a gay marriage, at least presently cannot procreate a meotically recombined offspring with a genome composed entirely of two random halves of its parents genomes
6. the care of children and their education and socialization, – unclear how this can be evaluated, clearly the mother-child bond triggered by the oxytocin rush induced by a suckling infant will probably be difficult for gay men to replicate, less so for a lesbian couple perhaps. However the existence of relatively strong and as compared to other terrestrial primates a far more nurturing father-child bond, coupled with the significant neuro-plasticity of the neo-cortex should enable a gay couple to care for, educate and socialise their children if they are so resolved
7. regulation of lines of descent – inheritance for adopted children should be relatively straightforward, complications could arise if the property is ancestral and the inheritance is challenged by kin (though the same can happen in traditional marriages as well);  as far as acceptance of any adoptive offspring into kinship ties with the extended families of the gay couple is concerned, that would remain a factor of whether the gay couple were able to maintain those kinship ties themselves. In any case, with increased incidence of nuclear families, and corresponding rise of extra-familial social support networks would tend to significantly reduce the need for kinship ties anyway

To sum up, gay marriages seem to display some of the key attributes and can probably discharge many of the functions to extents comparable with traditional marriage. Some of the significant attribute gaps being the ambivalence of social sanction, and the near total absence of religious, ritual, and custom or tradition based framework governing gay marriages. In terms of functions – the inability of gay marriages to constitute a procreative union and the potential concerns around, kinship ties, and unchallenged inheritance for the off-spring are the two notable gaps.

Consequently, it may seem appropriate, at this stage for nation-states with suitably ‘liberal’ polities to enact full legal equivalence of ‘gay marriage’. This should pave the way for increased social acceptance of the institution gradually.

Book Summary: Your Brain at Work – Part 1

By David Rock

HarperCollins Publishers

(The summary is mine based on excerpts, the graphics are not from the book).

Making decisions and solving problems relies heavily on a region of the brain called the prefrontal cortex. This is the last major region of the brain to develop during human evolution and occupies a mere 4% to 5% of the total volume of the brain. The prefrontal cortex holds the contents of our minds at any one point; this is where we hold thoughts that are not being generated from external sources or from our sense organs.

Five functions make up the majority of conscious thought, namely:

1. understanding – holding thoughts / concepts in attention long enough to see how they connect to other thoughts and concepts

2. decision – where we hold two concepts / thoughts in our attention, compare them to one another and make a value judgment or choice between them

3. recollection – calling to attention thoughts / concepts from long term memory

4. memorization – to hold a thought / concept in attention long enough for it to get lodged in the long term memory

5. inhibiting – keeping certain thoughts / concepts from intruding into ones attention

Conscious mental activity involving a combination of one or more of the above 5 is extremely resource intensive and consumes metabolic resources at very high rates. This places limitations on the use of the prefrontal cortex – it is energy intensive and hence subject to fatigue. Prioritizing the use of this ‘thought engine’ is therefore very important. However, ‘prioritizing’ itself is a very resource intensive use of the prefrontal cortex because it involves imagining and moving around concepts of which we have no direct experience – since it deals with mental activities to be done at some point in the future. Also prioritizing makes use all the above 5 brain functions – understanding new ideas – tasks and projects, making decisions, recollecting, memorizing and inhibiting all at once! Prioritizing work in a knowledge economy involving conceptual projects can be very mentally taxing.

A few suggestions to making this more efficient and less taxing;

1. Using visuals: The visual cortex is activated when we see actual pictures or use metaphors or stories – generate a picture in the mind’s eye. Visuals are rich in information and yet relatively easier for our brains to manipulate

2. Writing: Getting some key concepts / information out of our heads and on to paper

3. Delegation

Of blogs and posts

There was a time when many things were blog-worthy. New concepts and ideas, strongly held opinions that had to be expressed in response to some bit of news, replies to questions, rejoinders to criticisms, lengthy essays and diatribes, and such like reasons for the wordsmith within to give expression to his craft. Often, as one went about ones day, an interesting column in the newspaper, a thought provoking passage in a book read while commuting, a conversation with a colleague over lunch, or even something novel one spotted in the street, would trigger the thought – “I must blog this!”

Not much has changed in the stimuli feeding into the cauliflower, newspapers and periodicals are still read (may be heard in some cases), books are purchased and read, and the work days is filled with myriad conversations with colleagues, the city streets are as colourful as ever – and still not much seems to inspire the urge to furiously hammer away ate the keyboard and shoot off a blog entry. And I am not entirely sure I can place my finger on the reason. Yes, insufficient availability of time is a factor – nevertheless it should be possible to squeeze out the time on weekends and may be even some weekdays if it comes to that. But it doesn’t. Things don’t seem as blog-worthy as they did some years ago.

One factor – which I suspect plays a bigger role than time – is that blogs increasingly seem like monologues. Social networking and such avenues have weaned away many millions of eyeballs from blogs. Even serious readers have less time for blogs as they are busy updating what’s on their mind and reading what’s on the mind of their friends. Comments and discussions that arose in response to blog posts are now generally far less lively than they were before. and this is important – discussing ideas tends to generate greater mental focus on the themes and concepts involved, which in turn helps generate more ideas. Merely thinking about ideas by oneself may not be as fecund a process. This is best observed in the work-place. Large meetings tend to be disorganised and confused when it comes to ideas – but smaller focus groups of 3-5 competent individuals are often able to think of innovative solutions an ways forward to workplace problems they seek to resolve. In any case, the point is, the weakening of meaningful and sustained discussions over ideas stems the process of generating new ideas and hence new blog posts. – the process of ideation slows and blogging becomes a less interesting and hence far less frequent pursuit. Unless of course, the blog is used not as a platform to share and review ideas and theories, but a listening wall where one unburdens ones mind transforming the blog into a diary or such-like personal chronicle.

I think this is the speed breaker that Cynical Ruminations has hit. Where as Dharmaraja’s Ashram is practically shut down.

Show me the money . . .

The people are in debt. Their governments are in deficit. The pension liabilities are practically impossible to pay. The drastic re-skilling of workers needed to make economies competitive is unaffordable. Increasing revenues by raising taxes on a debt-ridden populace battling high unemployment would seem, for any democratic regime, suicidal. This then could be the story of almost any rich country one would care to pick. Given that most conventional methods of reducing deficits seem fraught with risks for these governments, perhaps they should start considering unconventional measures.

The Roman Emperors when faced with an empty imperial treasury would sometimes adopt an interesting remedy. Round up the wealthy citizens of Rome and extort huge sums of money from them. And surely, the prospects of rounding up fat-cat Wall Street bosses in say Guantanamo and lightening them of the burden of their ill-begotten bonuses, would sound like a temptingly just recompense to many. Perhaps similar fat-cats from the “City” can be brought in by means of extraordinary rendition? In any case, as fair as it may seem – this may not be the right thing to do. But the fact remains that huge amounts of wealth remains concentrated in the hands of a few. By some estimates, as of 2004, the top 1% wealthy families in the US owned a staggering 34% of the total wealth in that country! The bottom 40% on the other hand possessed a mere 0.2%.

This problem of highly unequal distribution of wealth – with a few wealthy people amassing immense fortunes – is not easy to resolve. In theory at least, the possibility of amassing such wealth often motivates much innovation and entrepreneurial risk taking. It may not be wise policy to threaten such a powerful motivation. Its also equally regrettable that few amongst the wealthy are prone to philanthropic distribution of wealth a la mode Mr Gates and Mr Buffet! But that could be the trick – is some way could be found for the very wealthy to willingly part with their wealth to fund such initiatives as deficit reduction, poverty reduction, education, basic infrastructure, healthcare, and so on.

Vanity could be the clue. As is natural for high-status individual – rich folk are bound to have a good measure of pride and perhaps vainglory. Could that be used to tap into their wealth? Perhaps it could – because governments through the ages have been vested with the power to confer status by awarding titles. Knights, barons, Counts, Earls, Rajahs, Nabobs, Rai-bahadurs, Amirs and Baigs! I am sure there would be many rich folk who would love to purchase such titles. And the Government could, if it played its cards well, turn in a handsome profit! Titles could be auctioned, elegant ceremonies where these are bestowed on the recipients can be organised, the mystique can be built up to drive up the prices!

In all likelihood – I suspect this already happens on a small to moderate scale. Governments only need to make this a grand spectacle and a great revenue earner!

Gods in the synapses!!

A few months ago, I had an interesting conversation by way of a series of comments & replies on a friend’s Facebook© update. Basically, I got consigned to “burn” for believing in Allah instead of believing in God. I was torn between laughing at the consignor and feeling sorry for the person. But since this was a friend's Facebook page, I restrained myself from making too many more “tongue in cheek” remarks that would have made the discussion more ‘lively’ than it already had gotten. I am still puzzled about what led the aforementioned gentleman to decide that I adhere to that particular set of religious beliefs (or any variety of religious belief for that matter).

But the incident did get me thinking about my personal beliefs in matter of religion. And that, unfortunately is no straightforward matter. For all intents and purposes, I go about my daily activities without much reference to or cognizance of any set of religious beliefs about any variety of ‘great sky-man’ – ooops, apologies, I meant ‘great sky-person’. In other words, religion and Gods are of no consequence for my day to day activities, tasks, likes, dislikes, aspirations, plans, and such like.

Does that make me an atheist? No. I have my grouses with atheists. Firstly, atheists seem to have solved the knotty problem of evil and arrived at the answer – religion. The claim that religion is key cause of evils in human society is at best shallow, at worst facetious, and is not supported by the sort of rigorous evidence that the very ‘science’, which atheists swear by, demands. But the bigger problem with this characterisation is that the purported objective behind ridding the world of religion  – that of bettering the lot of our species – gets shoved into the back seat and religion bashing becomes an end in itself. Pseudospeciation is common and prevalent enough in our species to make many suspect it to be endemic to human nature – religion is just another definition to mark out the ‘in-group’, (along with nationality, language, race and even sexual orientation), and de-humanise the ‘out-group’. In fact, one can argue that religion can tend to ameliorate pseudospeciation by seeking to induct others into the ‘in-group’ by way of conversion!

But that’s not why I am not an atheist. The thing is, just as I do not care to observe any particular religious tenets, I do not particularly care to deny or denounce them either. In short, I don’t just care enough about religious beliefs to denounce them as falsehoods and be an atheist.

So does that make me irreligious? No again. For while I may not care about religious beliefs, I would not say that I do not care about religion. Belief may be the foundation of faith for a large number of adherents of a religion, it is only one attribute. Religion is a complex phenomenon possessing many layers and attributes rich in meaning and metaphor and in my opinion deeply connected to our very humanness.

This last claim may seem surprising, but it seems very possible that there are distinct biological underpinnings behind the tendency of us humans to be religious. Some studies, for instance, seem to indicate that the tendency to acquire religion (any religion, not a particular one) tends to be somewhat highly heritable. Certain anthropological studies also seem to indicate that religious ideas tend to follow certain templated patterns that may be in some sense ‘pre-programmed’ proclivities. The analogy with the ‘language instinct’ may seem obvious here – mental structures and templates for a ‘natural grammar’ ‘hard-wired’ in the human brain making the ‘tendency to acquire a language’ practically universal in our species. Of course, the ‘religious instinct’- even if we very prematurely call it that – is certainly nowhere as well evolved as the language instinct, and is probably, at this stage, highly conjectural. Nevertheless, religious ideas, at the very least, certainly tend to be highly successful, sticky and durable cultural memes.

The many and various social, cultural, economic, political, ethical, philosophical, anthropological, (and many other social-scientical) dimensions of religion are, on the other hand, are almost blindingly obvious. Turning a blind eye to these and focusing on ‘belief’ is a rather narrowly Abrahmic persuasion. Bracketing off the belief to examine the other facets closely can lead to interesting insights about religions. For example, many have argued that religion is not essential to develop a working moral framework for human society. It is plain that several moral principles are common to most religious traditions. Some observers though, have drawn a very perceptive contrast between these ethical ideas common to many religions and undiluted genetic self interest of the individual.

Consider for example monogamy which most religions tend to encourage as virtuous – and some even try to enforce by prohibiting polygamy as sinful! But what monogamy, in fact tends to achieve is to ensure that as far as possible, every man gets at least one wife and every woman gets one husband. And everyone gets a chance to pass on their genes to the next generation – everyone is happy and human society becomes more harmonious. But is monogamy in the best genetic self-interest of individual humans? May be not. The genetic self-interest of powerful and high-status men would lie in amassing a harem and siring scores of children! And the genetic self-interest of frustrated and desperate low status poor men, deprived of legitimate mates by the rich and the powerful would be to seduce – even rape! And what about the women? Well, who is to argue that a woman who gets one-half (or even one-fourth or one-tenth) of a rich, powerful and high status man is really worse off than a woman who gets one-whole of a poor, low-status man? By choosing to be the third wife of a rich merchant, a woman may be securing the prospects of her progeny far better than by being the sole wife of a peasant! So much for self-interest then – but does social harmony stand a chance in such a scenario? Monogamy then is the more stable option – and religion, as the enforcer of monogamy, brings about social harmony, in this example. This is not a very far-fetched scenario. Religion very likely has indeed played such a stabilising role in human cultural evolution – which, apart from the meme theory, could also explain its durability. Religion then is not just a meme, it quite possibly is a sociobiological construct! I would not be hasty in voting for the eradication of religion, my personal non-belief notwithstanding.

But, given that religion can tend to bring our tendency for pseudospeciation – intolerance and hatred – in sharp focus, it needs tempering. This can be achieved in two inter-linked ways – the global cosmopolitan liberal outlook embodied in the ideals of democratic regimes needs to ensure swift state action against acts of intolerance and hatred, and the very same global cosmopolitan liberal outlook needs to expand by encouraging people to know about (books and education) and interact with (community initiatives, internet) peoples of other religions, nationalities, races and ethnicities. The more I know about other religions, the more adherents of various religions I socialise with, the less likely am I to pseudospeciate – the interaction would lead to a blurring of the sharp divide between in-group and out-group.

But coming back to me. Neither an atheist, not a religious believer – am I bereft of religious persuasion? A fence-sitter? A waffler? A ‘feel-good’ fluff-bunny new-ager who has contrived a cosy religion of convenience? Neither. By birth, upbringing and now by decision – emphatically NOT by faith or belief – I am Hindu. My beliefs or lack thereof is immaterial actually; I am part of an ancient and profound religious tradition that in the richness of its cultural heritage, depth of its philosophical inquiry, prodigious beauty of its artistic, literary and architectural achievement, is second to none. In the tolerant, inclusive and humane openness that at the best of times it is very much capable of, it is probably unique. I owe it to my fathers, who have lived by and sustained this living tradition before me, to belong to and perpetuate it for posterity. This duty enjoined upon me, I cannot deny or refute.

Prohibited!

 

I wish I was an all powerful, autocratic, tyrannical dictator! There are so many things I would love to extirpate from human society on pain of death!

Here’s a sample:

1. Public Display of Religion: All religious activities and gatherings to be restricted to private residences or designated, notified places of worship. Even within private residences and notified places of worship, any religious observance, activity or ritual that leads to increased ambient noise levels outside the private residence or place of worship, shall remain prohibited. Permission may be granted to to hold specific religious observances, on specific occasions, in very specific open spaces that are well demarcated and can be appropriately ring fenced if said specific open spaces have been the sites of said observances by historical tradition at least 1000 years old; however even these would be subject to ambient noise control restrictions. All other religious displays, observances and gatherings including but not limited to processions, ritual worship, sermons, preaching, praying, etc., in public places including but not limited roads, open grounds, parks, river banks, auditoriums, class rooms, residential or commercial complexes, railway stations, bus stations, railway & bus carriages, airports, seaports, shopping complexes, cinema complexes, industrial complexes or premises, etc., are completely banned!
   
   In simple words – religion must get out of our streets and must stay in our homes and temples.
   
2. Never Ending and morally bankrupt Soaps (ongoing, episodic work of dramatic fiction presented in serial format on television): These the bane of ‘modern society’. Seemingly intelligent men, women and children spend hours every day for many years following the on screen antics of terminally neurotic characters. Accordingly, no ‘soap opera’ can be broadcast on any private or publicly owned television network, unless the screen play for the ENTIRE series is completed and submitted for approval before hand. No soap opera can be televised daily but is allowed to air only one episode per week. Furthermore, no soap opera can air for more than 26 weekly episodes. The default duration of any soap opera can be no more than 13 episodes. In the event a show producer wishes permission for 26 episodes, he needs to submit a detailed proposal which shall be scrutinised by a panel of no less than 6 diverse literary, drama and film critics who would be required to examine the artistic and cultural merits of the screen play and the show and only if found to be of high artistic and cultural value would permission be granted for 26 episodes.
   
   In addition, the screenplay would also need to be scrutinised by a panel comprising of professors of moral philosophy, sociologists, anthropologists, psychologists and behavioural economists who would need to evaluate the screenplay and storyline as to whether it is detrimental to societal ethical values consistent with the current moral zeitgeist of the social group (country or language group) that is likely to view the resultant soap opera.
   
   Needless to say, all panels are required to strictly adhere to reasonable turnaround times (no longer than 5 working days for a single screen-play). Panel decisions will be subjected to peer-review after the shows start airing to ensure efficacy.
   
   In simple words – the idiot box throws out a lot of crap which needs to be flushed down the toilet.
   

There are a few more things I would like to add, but would take me some time to evolve appropriate recommendations, so I will post those later.

Good Friday recollection . . .

Good Friday remains one of my favourite holidays given as it annually provides us with at least one long weekend. Other holidays keep changing the day of the week they fall on! And our Hindu holidays even change the date of the year they fall on!! So my dear Pontius Pilate, thank you for arranging such a very convenient holiday for us all!!

But anyway, often on Good Friday, I recollect a conversation I had many years ago, when I was in college, with a devout Christian classmate regarding this wonderful holiday. Since this happened many years ago, I obviously do not recollect it verbatim, but the conversation went something like this:

Me: Hi XXX, wish you a very Happy Good Friday! Hope you enjoy the festival celebrations!

Christian Classmate: We don't wish each other "Happy Good Friday" and we don't 'celebrate'; it is not a festival!

Me: Oh really? But it is a holiday, so thought . . . .

Christian Classmate: It is the day when our Lord Jesus Christ died on the cross . . .

Me: Oh, so it is like Moharrum where they mourn the martyrdom of Imam Hussain?

Christian Classmate: No no what are you talking about.

Me: OK, hmm, but very weird, why do you call it "Good" Friday then, you know, it was the day Jesus like died and all . . .

Christian Classmate: No no, but He came back from the dead after three days so it is Good Friday!

Me: That's not logical is it, I mean the day He comes back from the dead would be a 'Good' day, but the day he dies has to be bad! I mean you don't even celebrate it as a festival because it was the day he died, wo why the hell do you call it 'Good' then! You should call it Lousy Friday!

Christian Classmate: No, no, it is Good Friday because He died for our sins!

Me: What!?!

Christian Classmate: Yes, he died on the cross for our sins, hence it is Good Friday!

Me: But that's absurd, you have a god who bcomes a scapegoat so that you can sin!

Christian Classmate: No no, he washes our sins by dying on the cross!

Me: Yikes. Why the hell does a god need to die to wash your sins! I mean he's a god, he can just cancel off your wicked karma or something can't he?

Christian Classmate: Oh don't ask me all these difficult questions, I don't know. Look, I need to leave early this evening going to church to pray and all. Bye!

Of elephants and journalists . . .

 

Cousin Ashutosh brought an interesting piece on Indian foreign policy, by Barbara Crossette in the Jan/Feb 2010 issue of Foreign Policy, to my notice. Ashu, and some others have written their own responses to this article. But the Gobi has to add its two pennies worth doesn’t it?

Most reasonable readers would agree that Ms Crossette has gone out on the limb a little with that one. But then does it really matter what one journalist who should have known better writes as long as serious and responsible businessmen, bankers, bulls & bears are willing to put their money where their respective mouths are (figuratively). The proof of the pudding is in the eating and many around the world are eager to dine at the splendid banquet India has to offer these days – so eager as to be willing to gate-crash!

That being said, the thesis and arguments in the article are sloppy at best.

Take India’s non participation in the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT) and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), for instance. If the blatant and obviously state-sponsored proliferation of A Q Khan goes un-investigated and unpunished, if North Korea and Iran can merrily cock a snook at them while US Marines go chasing after non-existent WMDs in Iraq, these treaties, (the CTBT and NPT), are not only discriminatory, they are utterly impotent. No reason for our policy makers to waste time over them. We never needed to sign to have a spotless proliferation record.

As to Doha - it was as much US intransigence as India & China's that led to the talks failure. If the US can splurge billions and rewrite the rule-books to protect their unscrupulous and filthy rich financiers, India has every right, nay, a sacred obligation, to safeguard the interests of its 200 million impoverished farmers!

So much for being a headache in international negotiations - probably for the first time since independence India has a large enough say in international forums to make a stand against international treaties that may not be in the best interests of a large number of its citizens. It is gratifying to see policy makers and politicians having the moral fibre to finally take that stand!

So yes, the evidence presented and inference drawn in this article is full of holes.

Yet of one thing we must be mindful of - decades after independence, India has the heft to impact global policy negotiations. It is natural that such clout will be accompanied by increased media glare, not always for the right reasons nor always proportional to the issues at hand. The intense discourse in the international media on US and Chinese policy issues is an apt example. We must therefore learn to take criticism in stride and not go over-board in critiquing the critiques! The Indian media would need to be especially wary of going on a jingoistic defensive-offense!!

And more to the point, the worst 'critiques' may have a grain of truth. For instance the allusions to corruption among Indian officials leading to diversion of World Bank funds are very much in the range of possibility. These should be examined and investigated, and the guilty, if they be so, brought to book. This we would be wise to do even if we consign the rest of the article to be ignored to the oblivion it deserves.

Jungle Bells and Hoppy Christmas

 

It’s that time of the year again, the later half of December. Across most of India, the weather’s rather pleasant – even Bombay is reasonably tolerable as against being oppressively hot. In many of our work places, “Head Offices”, variously located across Europe and North America have come to a grinding halt – practically every second or third email pings back with an OOO auto-reply. Many here too have plans of long weekend getaways secured by appending a couple of days off from work to the Christmas weekend.

English movie cable television channels are awash with red and white ‘ho ho hos’, and as if to replicate said TV channels, 5 Star Hotels and Malls across the city sport illumination of the “Christmas lights” variety, have in their lobbies grotesque artificial fir trees festooned with baubles, often smattered with fluffed up cotton wool in an attempt to give it the appearance of snow.

Hmmm, nice. But why though? Don’t get me wrong, I have nothing against Christmas. I wouldn’t touch those foaming at the mouth, Happy-Holidays-NOT-Merry-Christmas-opinionated, Letter-to-a-Christian-Nation thumping, rabidly evangelical atheists with a barge pole. But I cannot help wonder, who are all those hotels and malls pitching Christmas at? Do Christians in India throng to hotels and malls every December instead of celebrating with their families in the traditional way? And even if they do, is the Christian population of the country, at a little over 2%, a sizeable enough market to attract which all these hotels and malls deck themselves up so? Or are they angling for foreigners – tourists from Europe and North America who want to expend their holidays in ‘Incredible India’? May be they are – but I have not really noticed a visible increase in the number of foreign tourists at these hotels and malls around Christmas. And even if we assume that there indeed is a surge in the number of European and North American tourists around this time, do they really want to see fake Christmas trees and snow standing awkwardly in the midst of throngs of guests and shoppers milling around minding their own business? (On a very recent occasion when we were out for dinner, HRH was the only person in the otherwise busy hotel lobby who was paying any attention to the Christmas decorations.)

That Diwali is celebrated with great zeal – hotels, malls, shops and bazaars, all getting into celebratory frenzies – should come as no surprise. Other religious minorities in the country – Muslims, Sikhs, and even Buddhists are probably far more numerous than Christians; and as aggregates are a bigger target market – and yet we don’t see hotels, malls and shops decorated for Eid, Nanak Jayanti or Buddha Pournima! Even such minority groups as the Jains and Parsis, who can pack a financial punch way above their numbers, do not seem to have the privilege of having their main holiday celebrated by the temples of consumerism. That honour is reserved only for Christmas.

And that is precisely why these Christmas decorations irk me so – they have nothing to do with religion, they are far far removed from the Gandhian secular ideal of sarv-dharm-samabhav. I suspect they are hooked to Christmas because of its “life-style” associations. I fear that Christmas, by now, is intricately meshed with the Global Cosmopolitan Consumerist milieu, which wannabes across the developing world aspire for with acute longing. And I don’t think this near blind longing is a good thing for the developing world, I don’t think it is a good thing for Christmas either to be reduced and trivialised as a symbol of western consumerism.

And for this reason, I don’t quite like that Christmas tree, standing in that hotel lobby.

Jamboo-phalani, जम्बूफलानि

 

जम्बूफलानि पक्वानि
पतंति विमले जले
तानि मत्स्या न खादंति
जालगोलक शंकया!

3 poor brahmins from a village outside Ujjaini were on the way to the court of Emperor Vikramaditya seeking alms. On the way they passed by a picturesque stretch along the river bank where a tall Jāmbool tree stood laden with ripe fruit. They refreshed themselves with sweet fruit and cool water and sat down to rest in the shade of the large tree. Some fruit laden branches of the tree stretched over the water and from time to time, ripe fruit would fall into the clear water. They watched for a while and noticed that every time a jāmbool would fall in the water, several river fish would swim closer to the fruit and then dart away without eating!
Intrigued, the 3 brahmins described the peculiar occurrence –

जम्बूफलानि पक्वानि - ripened jāmbool fruit,
पतंति विमले जले - fall into the clear waters,
तानि मत्स्या न खादंति - them (the fruit), fish wouldn't eat,
जलमध्ये डुबुग डुबुग || ー'plonk', 'plonk', (they sounded) in the water!

They knew not why the fish never ate the delicious fruit. Puzzled they, went on with their journey to Ujjaini. As they queued up outside the Imperial shrine for alms from the Emperor, they noticed a court official talking to each alms seeker and handing them a coin. When the 3 brahmins approached the official he asked them what they sought. Ashamed to say they were seeking alms, the three said they had a verse to recite to the Emperor.
The official asked them to recite the verse, and the three recited:

जम्बूफलानि पक्वानि
पतंति विमले जले
तानि मत्स्या न खादंति
जलमध्ये डुबुग डुबुग ||

"Very nice, but the last phrase sounds crude!" said the official, "can't you refine it before you recite it for Emperor"? Looking sheepish, the 3 brahmins told the official what they saw by the river bank and how they did not know why the fish never ate the fruit. "Alright", said the official, "when you go to the Emperor, recite these 3 lines and at the end add this phrase - जालगोलक शंकया!

The 3 brahmins did as they were told. On hearing the verse, the Emperor smiled. He gave the brahmins a gold coin each as a gift and said, "O learned ones, the verse you just recited is very nice, but there is something different about the last line. Tell me did you really compose the complete verse?"

The 3 brahmins were again abashed, "O Mighty One, that court official over there, he changed the last phrase of our verse!" they said. The Emperor laughed and beckoned official who approached smiling. "Few can finesse a verse the way you can Kālidāsa!", said the Emperor.

जालगोलक शंकया! - (because they) suspected (the fruit) to be the round-weights of a net!

The tale, most probably is apocryphal; but by attributing the above lines to none other than Kālidāsa, (Sanskrit composer - known for such great works as Meghadootam, Shākuntala, and Kumāra Sambhava), they become difficult to forget!!

Litterbugs!

 

“India Shining”, they said. “Resurgent India”, one which is decoupled and which grows at 5%+ when the even rich-world is in recession! And we gloat unashamedly about our very talented super-achieving Diaspora! The princely NRIs and PIOs.

No matter how much we achieve though, at the core we are a nation of filthy littering pigs! Most public places, but especially well known tourist destinations – the ones that are on everyone’s ‘sight-seeing’ list will sport the following strewn about:

1. Plastic bags
2. Empty Soft drink bottles
3. Empty packets of chips, biscuits and such-like sundry eatables
4. Paper napkins (otherwise called ‘tissue paper’)
5. Cigarette butts / empty packets of cigarettes
6. Peanut shells / Banana skins / Apple Cores
7. Stubs of maize with the grain eaten away (bhutta, as it is called in Hindi)
8. Red stains of chewed paan spitted about
9. Remnants of picnic meals – paper plates, plastic spoons, paper cups etc
10. Bits of sodden newspapers
11. Graffiti saying “Arun loves Meena” and similar stuff
12. And other such miscellaneous garbage

It is shocking, infuriating and it is observed unfailing across the country. It makes me want to throttle someone. India is a beautiful country with bountiful natural beauty and a heritage to take pride in that has endowed us with rich and dazzling monuments. But we, the people of India, seem utterly incapable of nurturing this inheritance and preserving it for prosperity with its pristine beauty intact. As ‘tourists’ it seems to be out national obsession to go to such places, make a lot of noise, eat a lot of junk and pile up mountains of litter.

I sometimes feel only draconian laws brutally enforced by a right minded police state may knock some sense into us – if not, it would at least keep our tourist destinations clean! I would love for all these places to have a bunch of tough and incorruptible cops provided with whips and the mandate to land lashes on the unworthy rump of anyone who litters!!

 

Jugalbandi (जुगलबन्दी)

 

The jugalbandi is a very special form of recital where two maestros get together to present a performance. Many tend to misinterpret the jugalbandi as a competitive format where the maestros try to outdo each other in displaying their proficiency. Well, petty apprentices may play such games – most maestros are beyond them.

Most  jugalbandis I have listened to have tended to be dazzling virtuous cycles – may be I should say virtuoso cycles – of outstanding creativity, with each maestro inspiring the other to ever greater heights.

The memorable ‘jugalbandis’ between Pandit Ravi Shankar and Yehidi Menuhin, immortalised in the album West Meets East took the world of music by storm by their superb inter-traditional melding.

Below sample jugalbandi with Ustad Vilayat Khan Sahib on the sitar, with Ustad Ali Ahmed Hussein on the shehnai is a nice example.

The maestros present an ecstatic bandish in Raga Anandi Kalyan.

Rāgeshree (रागेश्री)

 

Rāgeshree (रागेश्री), is a night melody and a rāgini of exceptional sweetness, like its sister Bāgeshree (बागेश्री). Though the poignancy of the विरहिनी seems toned down, it is still replete with शृंगार रस the essence of romance. I have been looking for some good recitals, some बड़ा ख्याल renditions for a while now – today stumbled upon two astounding pieces; one a performance by Ganasaraswati Smt. Kishori Amonkar and a second rare live concert recording of Ustads Nazakat Ali Khan Sahib and Salamat Ali Khan Sahib. These are utterly delightful

The quest for Rāgeshree today was triggered as I listened to a smallish recital of this melody by the Sitar Maestro Ustad Vilayat Khan Sahib. A small sample of a similar rendition of this rāgini by the Maestro along with his son is below.

 

I sit, letting the swaras wash over me, a truly delightful close to the weekend.

Far from the @#&*!@ crowds

Thomas Hardy was the master of understatement. “Far from the Maddening Crowds” is monumentally off the mark. Gobi No. 2 has discovered that he is severely allergic to crowds. Crowds follow the law of the Least Common Denominator. Thus the average intelligence of the crowd drops to the level of the dumbest individual in it. This severely assails the mental equilibrium of the Gobi struggling valiantly to keep away from the crowd.

But it is impossible to be the proverbial lotus leaf when attempting to navigate ones way through a crowd. The crowd is omnipotent and omnipresent. There is no escaping it. It sucks all individuals into its ruthless maws and eradicates their ego.

I guess in that sense, it should be a good place to practice transcendental meditation. Let me try that the next time I need to venture out into the fearsome crowds.

तूर्तास गाभण!

तूर्तास गाभण! - Presently Pregnant

Most would construe the above as a rather crude (and very rude) way to describe the condition of a woman who is on, or in the build up phase towards, maternity leave. Most ordinary normal people - and mind you ordinary and normal are key operatives here - would be absolutely bamboozled if told that the above phrase is part of a remark - rather a rhetorical question - regarding a cup of tea! What on earth does the state of pregnancy have to do with a cup of tea? (Unless some marketing guru were to try to do an MR Coffee on some brand of tea!)

Here's what -

Many of us Indians, thanks to the Brits, have developed the habit of sipping tea with "a spot of milk". However, unlike the Brits, we have a fondness for a good deal more than just a spot of milk. Also, very very unlike the rest of the world - we Indians 'cook' tea very differently. We don't add tea leaves to a kettle full of hot water and allow it to brew. We take a vessel with some amount of water and set it on the stove and when the water warms up a bit, milk, tea-leaves and sugar are added in ample amounts and the potion is allowed to cook on a high flame. If the tea being prepared is 'special' or 'masala' chai - it may be cooked entirely in milk with generously stingy pinches of cardamom, nutmeg or such other condiments. When properly cooked, the 'tea' / chai is filtered into cups / glasses and served. If served in a cup and saucer, it is customary to pour the boiling tea into the saucer and blow it cold before sipping it from the saucer. A regular cup of tea may be about two saucerfuls. A saucer is also a handy way to share a cup of tea amongst two persons - though this sort of camaraderie is increasingly rare nowadays.

India has millions of roadside tea-shops (tea-howels, to be precise), which employ kids to run a sort of tea delivery service. The tea-kids go about with a battered olf aluminium kettle containing boiling tea in one hand, and a clutch of tea-glasses often carried in a wire tray similar to the one used for milk-bottles in the good old days. Particularly dexterous tea-kids may carry a clutch of cups and saucers instead of tea glasses.

And, so the story, or rather the 'character sketch', goes that a certain elderly gentleman was served a cup of tea, along with a bunch of acquaintances. Upon siping a bit of the chai, the said gentleman opined that the tea contained a lot less milk than a bonafide cup of tea should contain. Now, a dressing-gown clad English or brown sahib, reclining in a garden chair with a tea tray set on a tea-poy before him would, on discovering the insufficiency of milk in the tea would simply order the sepoy to pour a spot more of milk into his cup, and that would be that!

But the gentleman in question was no sahib. He merely fixed a stern beady eye upon the hapless tea-kid and queried - "रत्नंगिरिच्या समस्त म्हशीस तूर्तास गाभण काय रे झम्प्या?" - which losely translated means - "Are all the she-buffaloes in Ratnagiri presently pregnant, brat?" When asked like this, the poor brat had no reply to make.

This stereotypical, but very very apt depiction occurs in the "character sketch" titled Antu Barva (अंतू बरवा) by the renowned Marathi writer, dramatist, translator, poet, lyricist, composer, actor, orator, singer, director - basically very multi-talented artist - named P L Deshpande (पु ल देशपांडे)
better known to almost all Marathi speakers as PuLa. And Antu Barva is the archetypical chitpavan (चित्पावन) a community among others, that inhabits a small litoral stretch on the western coast of India known as the Konkan, (to which yours truly belongs). A community of sharp, slightly lazy, thrifty and proud folk that is known for acerbic crooked speech - like the one sampled above.

Stereotypes?

My expatriate colleagues have found that this matches their experience . . .

This is an insightful understanding of Eastern Culture Vs. Western Culture... in an
course one can't generalize everyone into these 'categories' but the drawings do
capture the essence of cultural differences between the western and Asian cultures,
in a snippy entertaining way. Useful to know, for people who deal (or whose teams deal)
with people from other cultures; these images have become extremely popular across the corporate world.
Blue --> Western,       Red --> Asian
 Opinion


Way of Life


Punctuality


Contacts


Queue when Waiting


Sundays on the Road


Party



In the restaurant

Travelling

Handling of Problems

Three meals a day


Transportation

Elderly in day to day life


Moods and Weather



The Boss
 

The child

 
 
These pictorial representations were designed by Liu Young who was born in China and educated in Germany

May the bloggings begin . . .

A new chapter in collaborative blogging has teh begun! Two like minded nutcases, whose minds are equally unhinged in often diametrically oposite directions have decided to pour the vitriolic gruel that auto-cooks in the cauliflorean crevices of their cranial cavities into the bottomless pit of blogspace.

Said gruel is expected to be highly corrosive, without any known, predicted, predicated, or pre-dictated attributes. The gruel may display arbitrarily directed or misdirected toxicity and may or may not possess any known antidotes. It is expected to be a cathartic process as may be expected from the deployment of intellectual laxatives.

You have been warned.