Hi All,
I recently finished reading Chetan Bhagat’s [CB] latest book ‘2 States’ and boy it has been one good read. Chetan in his typical style has rendered yet another book in first person narrative. This genre of writing is usually considered not as interesting as third person narratives. But Chetan has repeatedly proven us wrong.
The book is by and large a realistic account of what lovers have to go through in India (Though I am not one myself, I have enough friends who vouch by this book). So I really liked the realistic tone of this book. Many conversations between key characters are very much stuck to the ground and showed how typical Indian family conversations would be.
CB has taken the liberty of dramatic license and exaggerated the gimmickry performed by the lovers to convince their other half’s parents but still he has been careful enough to keep it within conceivable reach of imagination. From taking tuitions for his lover’s brother to preparing business proposals for her father, our hero seems to be doing everything and anything to win over the bride’s family. His lover proves she is no lesser when she ensures the smooth function of her lover’s cousin sister’s marriage.
But many arguments among key characters are not taken to their logical conclusion. CB has ,intentionally i believe, shied away emotional outbursts of older characters which you would normally expect given the gravity of the situation the characters find themselves in. Probably he has done this keeping in mind commercial considerations, after all he is writing for a young audience and we dont want to read about oldies crying and screaming at each other.
Overall, a good book to read and ponder over.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
There is no I in TEAM
Hi All,
Last night's ODI match against Australia was just electrifying to say the least. We saw fortunes fluctuate within a span of few overs which again reminded us that the ODI format of the game can entertain us just as equally as the slam - bam T20. (I am digressing here.) It was a run feast for the spectators and they lapped it up in typical Indian style; by drowning out the stadium with their sonorous chanting.
We also witnessed the master blaster Sachin in one of his best displays of batting prowess and genius. The end result was disappointing nevertheless but there are lessons to be carried away from this outing.
The most prominent lesson we can learn is that there is no 'I' in team. A team needs each and every member to fire on all cylinders. Yesterday Sachin was in his elements, scoring boundaries at will and running sensibly between the wickets. But it takes 2 hands to clap and likewise it takes a team effort to overcome a humongous total of 350. While Sachin was making every possible effort to take India to the finish line, his own compatriots were sabotaging him in every way possible. The famed Indian top order collapsed like a flimsy cardboard structure. Wicket after wicket fell and we were almost half down before Sachin could find a reliable partner in Raina. So it's clear, even a great like Sachin can't win matches single handedly. We need the whole team to give their best.
Another take away for the Indian team....Temperament is important in crunch scenarios like the one yesterday. The nerves started showing when Raina got out. Jadeja was trying to scamper across for every delivery when there was clearly no run in it. It came as no surprise that he was run out, mostly due to his own undoing. As if we have had not enough of run outs, the nerves showed up at the fag end of the match with an unnecessary 2nd run which eventually led to India's demise. The match was still winnable even with just one wicket in hand but lack of temperament did us in.
Alas, the jinx still stands....whenever Sachin gets a ton India tends to lose...:(
P.S. It took a couple of hours for me to digest India's loss yesterday esp. after seeing such a magnificent batting display. This post is dedicated to the world's best batsman, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar
Last night's ODI match against Australia was just electrifying to say the least. We saw fortunes fluctuate within a span of few overs which again reminded us that the ODI format of the game can entertain us just as equally as the slam - bam T20. (I am digressing here.) It was a run feast for the spectators and they lapped it up in typical Indian style; by drowning out the stadium with their sonorous chanting.
We also witnessed the master blaster Sachin in one of his best displays of batting prowess and genius. The end result was disappointing nevertheless but there are lessons to be carried away from this outing.
The most prominent lesson we can learn is that there is no 'I' in team. A team needs each and every member to fire on all cylinders. Yesterday Sachin was in his elements, scoring boundaries at will and running sensibly between the wickets. But it takes 2 hands to clap and likewise it takes a team effort to overcome a humongous total of 350. While Sachin was making every possible effort to take India to the finish line, his own compatriots were sabotaging him in every way possible. The famed Indian top order collapsed like a flimsy cardboard structure. Wicket after wicket fell and we were almost half down before Sachin could find a reliable partner in Raina. So it's clear, even a great like Sachin can't win matches single handedly. We need the whole team to give their best.
Another take away for the Indian team....Temperament is important in crunch scenarios like the one yesterday. The nerves started showing when Raina got out. Jadeja was trying to scamper across for every delivery when there was clearly no run in it. It came as no surprise that he was run out, mostly due to his own undoing. As if we have had not enough of run outs, the nerves showed up at the fag end of the match with an unnecessary 2nd run which eventually led to India's demise. The match was still winnable even with just one wicket in hand but lack of temperament did us in.
Alas, the jinx still stands....whenever Sachin gets a ton India tends to lose...:(
P.S. It took a couple of hours for me to digest India's loss yesterday esp. after seeing such a magnificent batting display. This post is dedicated to the world's best batsman, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
The cult of James Bond movies
Hi All,
I recently read an article about the demise of an actor who played the villain character in Dr No. That triggered me to start thinking about how even villain characters played in James Bond films become so famous...( I know some of you might be tempted to argue with me that villain characters can be equally popular but let’s leave that argument for some other day)
James Bond movies have become a cult in the big screen space in modern times. At many times they were considered mile stones for the entertainment industry. They showcased to the world what the future held for the audience. From the gadgetry to the swanky sea side villas, JB movies really transported the viewers to another world. It was the vicarious thrill of watching Mr. Bond shoot down the baddies and romp around with damsels which captivated the attention of the common man.
The ever increasing arsenal at Bond's hands created an aura of anticipation among the viewers in every consequent film and more importantly sustain interest in the series. This demand was to a large extent quenched by the producers of the movies. But in recent times, this trend is being reversed. Bond is increasingly being shown as a character with deep emotional connections with his companions and the emphasis on his gadgetry seems to have been given a miss.
We all grew up watching James Bond as the ultra high tech guy with great guns [pun unintended...:)] and driving swanky cars in dangerous curves[again pun unintended]. The latest JB movies had an element of absence in them. Or at least that’s me. How do you guys feel about this latest trend?
I recently read an article about the demise of an actor who played the villain character in Dr No. That triggered me to start thinking about how even villain characters played in James Bond films become so famous...( I know some of you might be tempted to argue with me that villain characters can be equally popular but let’s leave that argument for some other day)
James Bond movies have become a cult in the big screen space in modern times. At many times they were considered mile stones for the entertainment industry. They showcased to the world what the future held for the audience. From the gadgetry to the swanky sea side villas, JB movies really transported the viewers to another world. It was the vicarious thrill of watching Mr. Bond shoot down the baddies and romp around with damsels which captivated the attention of the common man.
The ever increasing arsenal at Bond's hands created an aura of anticipation among the viewers in every consequent film and more importantly sustain interest in the series. This demand was to a large extent quenched by the producers of the movies. But in recent times, this trend is being reversed. Bond is increasingly being shown as a character with deep emotional connections with his companions and the emphasis on his gadgetry seems to have been given a miss.
We all grew up watching James Bond as the ultra high tech guy with great guns [pun unintended...:)] and driving swanky cars in dangerous curves[again pun unintended]. The latest JB movies had an element of absence in them. Or at least that’s me. How do you guys feel about this latest trend?
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
China: Is the dragon just breathing fire?
Hi All,
China’s recent protest to Indian PM’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh (AP) sparked off a flurry of diplomatic activity in New Delhi. The Chinese ambassador was summoned to clarify his government’s stand and to understand India’s position on the issue. Indian ministers also wasted no time in asserting that AP was an ‘integral and inalienable’ part of India.
In light of this incident and various others that have happened, I just wonder what is China’s ultimate aim in claiming territory that is clearly not hers. It also puzzles me where does this atrocious claim lie in the ‘peaceful rise’ strategy that China is purportedly following.
A few nagging questions remain…
1. Is this claim a ploy to keep India ‘under check’?
2. Is it advisable to maintain relations with people who threaten your own existence?
3. With the military option being ruled out by our own armed forces chiefs, what other alternatives do we have?
We should try to find answers to the above questions; the faster the better!
China’s recent protest to Indian PM’s visit to Arunachal Pradesh (AP) sparked off a flurry of diplomatic activity in New Delhi. The Chinese ambassador was summoned to clarify his government’s stand and to understand India’s position on the issue. Indian ministers also wasted no time in asserting that AP was an ‘integral and inalienable’ part of India.
In light of this incident and various others that have happened, I just wonder what is China’s ultimate aim in claiming territory that is clearly not hers. It also puzzles me where does this atrocious claim lie in the ‘peaceful rise’ strategy that China is purportedly following.
A few nagging questions remain…
1. Is this claim a ploy to keep India ‘under check’?
2. Is it advisable to maintain relations with people who threaten your own existence?
3. With the military option being ruled out by our own armed forces chiefs, what other alternatives do we have?
We should try to find answers to the above questions; the faster the better!
Monday, September 14, 2009
Are we being PENNY WISE and POUND FOOLISH?
Hi All,
The government's recent directive to all its ministers to shed luxury and lead an austere life jolted most ministers out of their comfort zones. Some gave defiant interviews while others just twittered away. But when the message was reinforced, one by one fell into place. Suddenly, being austere became the latest fad. Minister after minister 'voluntarily' gave up all of his luxuries. Flying economy became the order of the day and taking Re 1 salary was just something that was ordinary. Now for those of you who haven’t been watching the news and wondering where this is all happening guess what. It’s all happening right here in India. [No I am not kidding...:)]
As comforting as it might sound, the government's latest directive may not really make any difference. I read an article on CNN IBN today which showed in numbers that a Key Figure is just saving Rs10000 by flying economy. Considerably nothing! I would say this directive is mere tokenism; to avoid the wrath of the people at a time of severe drought and mind boggling rise in prices.
It would be wiser to indulge in real cost cutting measures like weeding out government schemes that stink of wasteful expenditure. Removing subsidies from quarters that don’t require it will help as well. Government ads in newspapers every time a power station or a bridge is christened are a gross waste of taxpayer money and have to be stopped if the government wishes to give its latest directive any real credibility.
So what do you people think of the government's latest austerity drive. Is it just mere tokenism or something concrete?
The government's recent directive to all its ministers to shed luxury and lead an austere life jolted most ministers out of their comfort zones. Some gave defiant interviews while others just twittered away. But when the message was reinforced, one by one fell into place. Suddenly, being austere became the latest fad. Minister after minister 'voluntarily' gave up all of his luxuries. Flying economy became the order of the day and taking Re 1 salary was just something that was ordinary. Now for those of you who haven’t been watching the news and wondering where this is all happening guess what. It’s all happening right here in India. [No I am not kidding...:)]
As comforting as it might sound, the government's latest directive may not really make any difference. I read an article on CNN IBN today which showed in numbers that a Key Figure is just saving Rs10000 by flying economy. Considerably nothing! I would say this directive is mere tokenism; to avoid the wrath of the people at a time of severe drought and mind boggling rise in prices.
It would be wiser to indulge in real cost cutting measures like weeding out government schemes that stink of wasteful expenditure. Removing subsidies from quarters that don’t require it will help as well. Government ads in newspapers every time a power station or a bridge is christened are a gross waste of taxpayer money and have to be stopped if the government wishes to give its latest directive any real credibility.
So what do you people think of the government's latest austerity drive. Is it just mere tokenism or something concrete?
Thursday, September 10, 2009
Class 10 exams optional
Hi All,
The decision to make Class 10 exams optional has caught most of us by surprise. After years and years of practically stagnant educational policies, we finally have something that at least smells of change and that too refreshing at that. Though I tend to agree with this decision on the policy level, I am a little anxious on how much actual change is there going to be on the ground. Moreover, the proposed change itself and the consequent discourse has been very urban centric.
First, this decision applies only to CBSE students. One wonders what happens to large swathes of students who are affiliated to other boards esp. the state boards. There is no talk about a similar arrangement for them. Why doesn’t the central government want to bat for these kids too? Paraphrasing the education minister, don’t these kids deserve to be de-traumatized as well?
Apart from making exams optional, other venues of making education more enjoyable and stress free could have been ventured. How about a greater percentage of classes conducted using audio visual aids? Or even tweaking the examination pattern to make assessments application oriented rather than ones that test memory power. How about incorporating achievements in extracurricular activities into the core system so that more children will be encouraged to take up these activities?
As we all know government schools in this country are in a pathetic shape and can be best described as tokens of government presence in the education sector. If the government was truly interested in revolutionalizing education, then it should pour in more money for constructing AND maintaining primary and secondary schools.
So for the reasons mentioned above, I feel that the proposed changes will only benefit a section of the society and will not bring out the real and necessary changes in the existing system.
The decision to make Class 10 exams optional has caught most of us by surprise. After years and years of practically stagnant educational policies, we finally have something that at least smells of change and that too refreshing at that. Though I tend to agree with this decision on the policy level, I am a little anxious on how much actual change is there going to be on the ground. Moreover, the proposed change itself and the consequent discourse has been very urban centric.
First, this decision applies only to CBSE students. One wonders what happens to large swathes of students who are affiliated to other boards esp. the state boards. There is no talk about a similar arrangement for them. Why doesn’t the central government want to bat for these kids too? Paraphrasing the education minister, don’t these kids deserve to be de-traumatized as well?
Apart from making exams optional, other venues of making education more enjoyable and stress free could have been ventured. How about a greater percentage of classes conducted using audio visual aids? Or even tweaking the examination pattern to make assessments application oriented rather than ones that test memory power. How about incorporating achievements in extracurricular activities into the core system so that more children will be encouraged to take up these activities?
As we all know government schools in this country are in a pathetic shape and can be best described as tokens of government presence in the education sector. If the government was truly interested in revolutionalizing education, then it should pour in more money for constructing AND maintaining primary and secondary schools.
So for the reasons mentioned above, I feel that the proposed changes will only benefit a section of the society and will not bring out the real and necessary changes in the existing system.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Inner party democracy, anyone?
Hi all,
We always pride ourselves with the fact that we are the world's largest democracy. Every five years when we go out to vote, we leave the rest of the world in awe. We make them wonder how such a staggering exercise is being conducted without major hiccups. The statistics alone is sufficient to rattle any planner and put him/her out of sleep for days.
For all the chest beating that we indulge in, there is a darker side to our democracy that we usually don't visit that often and would certainly like to keep it under the wraps from prying outsiders' eyes. Probably you would have guessed what I am talking about right now.
Inner party democracy has not been on the agenda of many political parties for a long time. They, conveniently, forget the fact that charity starts at home and that being propagators of democracy also means that they themselves have to practice it both in letter and in spirit first. Most of the political parties today somehow give inner democracy a miss. Dynastic politics seems to be the order of the day. If not that then it is a single strong man whose whims and fancies decide who and how the party is run.
Is this what democracy is all about? We all know it wasn't meant to be this way. Why are our political parties behaving in a manner that can be best described as being devoid of democracy? And whose responsibility is it to put the house under order? Where do we draw the line between democracy and indiscipline? Should academic exercises like writing a book come under the purview of a party's ideology?
p.s. I didn't want to get into the gory details of dynastic politics and strong men who control their parties with an iron grip...we all know it too well don't we...:)
We always pride ourselves with the fact that we are the world's largest democracy. Every five years when we go out to vote, we leave the rest of the world in awe. We make them wonder how such a staggering exercise is being conducted without major hiccups. The statistics alone is sufficient to rattle any planner and put him/her out of sleep for days.
For all the chest beating that we indulge in, there is a darker side to our democracy that we usually don't visit that often and would certainly like to keep it under the wraps from prying outsiders' eyes. Probably you would have guessed what I am talking about right now.
Inner party democracy has not been on the agenda of many political parties for a long time. They, conveniently, forget the fact that charity starts at home and that being propagators of democracy also means that they themselves have to practice it both in letter and in spirit first. Most of the political parties today somehow give inner democracy a miss. Dynastic politics seems to be the order of the day. If not that then it is a single strong man whose whims and fancies decide who and how the party is run.
Is this what democracy is all about? We all know it wasn't meant to be this way. Why are our political parties behaving in a manner that can be best described as being devoid of democracy? And whose responsibility is it to put the house under order? Where do we draw the line between democracy and indiscipline? Should academic exercises like writing a book come under the purview of a party's ideology?
p.s. I didn't want to get into the gory details of dynastic politics and strong men who control their parties with an iron grip...we all know it too well don't we...:)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)