"When you cannot make up your mind which of two evenly balanced courses of action you should take - choose the bolder."
William Joseph Slim

Why do we have to kow-tow? Even when we are not at the receiving end.

After finishing the final exams of my 7th standard in Madras, I attended a summer camp for about 4 weeks, a move ostensibly to prevent my chronic boredom. All the other kids were about the same age, and soon the main attraction became football, so much so that we even had coaching on it. The camp had a couple of foreign kids, definitely Nordic, most probably Danish. Brothers they were, with the elder in my age-group, and both were quite athletic befitting the European physical stereotype. The elder played great football, and the rest of us, who just enjoyed kicking the ball around and screaming when we got anywhere near goal were quite awed by his rather physical and intense game, not something we were used to. Just being blond will turn heads and attract attention in India, and the kids were no different. I soon realized one thing: many of the other kids would put on an accent while speaking to him, probably so that the Dane would understand them. I don't think they were trying on a Western accent or were aping that alient intonation, but I genuinely think they were trying to speak in his way. It might be a manifestation of our much touted athithi devo bhava concept, but frankly I didn't agree much. Some of us would continue to speak to him like we normally did with each other, in fact exaggerate our Indian accents; why should we care if he could understand us with difficulty or not. I wasn't going out of my way or changing my speech to make him feel better. I reasoned he could jolly well make the effort to understand us instead of the other way round. Why should we change ourselves artificially just to accomodate some other guy? (Mind you, this kid was brash, rich, prone to acting tough and so on, and didn't deserve any special attention: he was just an oddity there, but the kind we seem to fawn over.)

I don't know if this constitutes pop-patriotism or silly jingoism, but it just seems the right thing to do. If you go to any decent nation, the onus is on you to behave the way their people do, and you make all the adjustments necessary. But, dislike as I do that thought, somehow, it seems borne out of observations that many of us behave in servile manners when confronted with Westerners in India. One may argue that most Westerners are clients for the Indians that deal with them and so it is worthwhile for us to make the changes. But how do kids (as in my experience) learn to behave in such a way? Is it ingrained in them to do so or do they pick it up from the elders around them?

When one joins software firms that deal with Western customers, one is instructed while using email communication to make hajaar spellchecks, ensure the tone is friendly yet businesslike, informal though not casual and so on, to make sure one doesn't offend the other person. When one receives a mail from the other side of the seven seas, one finds that those chaps write in the manner that would send Grammar teachers rushing to send their resignations. Not to say that we should be as lax as them, but why should we exercise such extreme care and try to present ourselves as highly pativrata wives from soap operas, who take a lot of nonsense from many?

I got into a session the other day where the speaker was instructing many with the intricacies of American slang versus their British equivalents. I'm not sure that is very high priority for Indians right now or what message that sends out, but it seems just the kind of things we seem to do. Learning English is fine, but putting on fake accents is a bit too much, and saying faucet is not really required.

Can this not be an aspect of national pride, where one doesn't give up one's daily manner in a vain attempt to impress a firang ? Why talk of grandiose plans to revive national honour when there are so many leaks among us? Or am I being simply impractical? Whatever be the case, I would hope I will be able to stick on to saying "schedule" instead of "skedule" and not drawl over a "sem-eye" final. I've never lived among foreigners, so I don't know if there is a sub-conscious impact to alter the accent, but I always try to notice changes in that direction among friends and relatives who've been abroad a considerable length of time, to see if they've changed in that respect. I somehow seem to have a little more pride in the ones that have held on to their little Indian accents, retaining whatever regional twists they had before. I don't know if it is tough, but their example seems to suggest it can be done. The analysis, from aye to zee? :-)

If great artistry in poetry, literature, painting et al is borne out of some amounts of suffering, well I may create a artistic masterpiece someday!

If my blog did not revolve around me, who would it revolve around?

Jonathan Neil Rhodes deserves a lot more luck than he's getting right now. The news is that he goes out for three weeks. South Africa lost probably their only flair player (it is debatable of course, but according to me he is).

One must learn to say "NO" effectively. The "NO" feeling usually springs out of the recesses of one's spirit, a nagging gut feeling that something somewhere is not quite right for one. One must be able to draw that feeling out and understand it in its entirety, so that it can be articulated and expressed, often in defence of one's stand. This can help one avoid the pitfalls later, an unpleasant situation needs to be nipped in the bud. Of course, it takes courage to say the N-word, but for that, one needs to convince oneself. Having done that and the reason being worthy of holding onto, one needs to stick to it. One will get challenged hugely by the tools of coercion, emotion, threat, sympathy and so on, but one needs to be steadfast in the stand. At least, extract the pound of flesh if possible. The repercussions will be a factor of course, but having calculated them, one needs to stick to the decision come what may. Difficult of course, but indecision is worse. Take the left or right handed paths at the fork, don't stand there wondering.

If discontent and frustration and depression were an energy source, we might have solved the world's energy crisis!

The Others starring Nicole Kidman as the only well-known face but backed up with an excellent supporting cast, especially the two children is a spook story with a fine twist at the end. Quite impressive story, the mandatory dark and dreary settings supplied with a decent explanation, and a quite taut script I thought. An example for movie makers, it doesn't have any digressions and is quite riveting.

Some people seem to have a lot of time. I, on the other hand, don't seem to have much time. I base my inferences of the former on the fact that I see many of these time-rich people lounging about, chatting inanely and even giggling while I trot about from meeting to meeting, squashing bugs all around and with not too many moments to, as the poet said, to stand and stare.

Of course, I have some spare time. Curiously, it is just about sufficient to spend in lamenting over the time that I think I do not have (SOS to Douglas Hofstadter to help me get out of that self-referential eddy). Of course, if instead of lamenting the fact I do not have any time (I should qualify it as spare or free time instead of plain vanilla "time") and thus using up all my spare time in it, I had spent it lounging about, chatting inanely and even giggling, I might have considered that I had indeed a decent amount of free time.

Having spent most of my free time in yearning for more, I wonder what I would do if I indeed had more free time. Parkinson and his contribution to the workplace spring to mind to assure me that I would probably not be faced by that practical problem, but in the theoretical realm, it serves as a knotty riddle. It seems that each moment that I spend in thought of unravelling it and in recording those thoughts, each keystroke that produces all these alphabets that made up these paragraphs and the ones to follow and the 'o' in this one... and the one in the next occurence of 'one' (if you get my drift) seems to fill out my spare time, thus further deepening my great envy and glacial emotions towards those who I see lounging about, chatting inanely and even giggling.

So many people see great virtue in depriving themselves of sleep in order to extend the waking hours (not time, as we all know that is a fixed resource) and the associated free time. A Robin Hood like gesture it may seem to them, stealing from sleep which can in concept do with less of it and give it to the that part of the 24 hours that keeps the eyelids open. I disagree. I don't oversleep, but I do like my 8 hours. I don't like to think that I may lose my daily ration, nor do I, if I can help it, take a loan from the eight units, even in the face of the next day's exam. Humans would've benefited if they could retain a sense of time even while sleeping, so that it seems like an essential activity (which it is, but like the backstage technician, doesn't recieve its due and is considered dispensable with the inevitable results) that deserves its fair share of planning and allocation (in manager-ese). "When can you submit this code? I'd like it to be done by tomorrow morning." "Can't. I have some work this night. I have to sleep for 8 hours and I'll mention it in the project plan." When that sort of explanation will start to be accepted would we be a more congenial and accomodative civilization.

Sleep tight!

One aspect that seems to have escaped Dr. Ali Bacher's efforts to present the 2003 World Cup in a favourable and multidimensional light are the rather dull and boring team uniforms doled out to the cricketers. The team colours and patterns resemble the usual uniform sets that teams wear round the year, thus denying this World Cup to visually stand out and be differentiated. If one were to catch a glimpse from any match years later, one would not be able to immediately identify it as a match from this Cup, unlike from the earlier Cups (since coloured clothing was introduced from '92). I quite liked the outfits of the '99 Cup. The designers of the 2003 WC don't seem to have any new patterns in mind, going for the mundane designs. The colours of Pakistan & Bangladesh, Canada & Zimbabwe seem all too similar and so on. Not a Cup to remember if you're sartorially inclined.

Harish had the funda that the World Cup is likely to be the swansong for many a champion cricketer, which may see them provide a sensational performance. And 3 days into it is proving him to be a semi-prescient being: Lara, Jayasuriya and now the great Wasim. Warne may not but who knows what more is in store in this already spell-binding Cup?

Let's face it: some people can't teach. It's not much of a skill that you can keep practise in the vain hope that it will dawn upon one. No amount of instructing from under the Bodhi tree will light the bulbs behind one's head if one doesn't have some amount of inherent ability. Of course, communication can be improved but the ability to empathise with one's audience, to percieve their moods, to be strict & flexible, to know what one is doing is not so easy to imbibe.

One should probably keep the book & pen ready for such contingencies. You may run the risk of being called a "schol" by your unappreciative classmates/co-inmates, but at least you will have something to do while seemingly making notes. You will find your sketching, poetic, orthographical skills improve. Even your ability to keep the straight face while guffawing behing those set jaws. I remember writing a few poems in Systems Programming classes (the ones I attended, not the ones I take ;-) ) and composing an alternative quiz in Multimedia Techniques. More of those and I'd have been able to take a better career decision.

Ishtori: (My cousin swears he did this)
My cousin is a Ph.D in Dentistry, something that doesn't happen everyday apparently. As a working student, he had to take a class some day. It had the usual compliment(sic) of sleeping students. At the end of this lecture, he apparently woke Rip V. W. and thanked him for not snoring and hence disturbing the others who were soundly off to the land of nod-nod.

Not as bad as the story in which there was one guy who dozed off in the middle of the lecture... which he himself was conducting. Kuch bhi kya!

I got out of work at 6.30 p.m. today. On a weekday. The world seems completely different. And alien. A sense of bewildered wonderment fills me. All I'm used to is the streetlights while going back home shining specks on traffic snarls below. Finding that people can find their way back home with natural light during weekdays is a re-discovery I make. A colleague mentioned how strange it seemed when he left at 8.00 p.m. a couple of months ago after we had spent the earlier weeks in the midst of some strange deadlines that meant we would leave in the wee hours. Spending time, nay doing time in closed confines induces surroundings that are beyond the chronological sense: it seems the same all the time, as long as you are inside.

Kashii hii avastha aaplii!

I've noticed that sometimes I, as do many others, use a great deal of adjectives & epithets very flippantly and loosely, at the drop of every hat and helmet. "Amazing!" or "brilliant" or "fantastic" when all it was catering to was the need to express an exclamation or to say "that was nice" or "quite interesting, haven't seen that before". It wouldn't have caused amazement or didn't shine in any exceptional manner or wasn't out of a fantasy, but I did call them that. What to do if something really outstanding happened? Would need to expand the lexicon to describe that. Need to be more careful in description and composition in future!

India is going to do rather well at the World Cup. I've just received an indication of that. Or maybe I need a trip to the Total Perspective Vortex.

(Pardon the cryptic messages, but I absolutely need to output all this somewhere.)

loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not. loves me, loves me not.

Sometimes I feel God can't decide. is this all for my good?

Back to BCJ (with a difference this time)

The General B.C.Joshi quiz or BCJ, as it is more popularly known,is back (though the organizers have been most uncharacteristically lax in publicising that fact yet). One of the top quizzes in Pune, IMHO, it was pretty much the best organized quiz around, though I would say that that crown was probably wrested by Chakravyuh last year. But the first 4 editions were great successes, creating a fount of goodwill that the present organizers can bank on.

BCJ is essentially a tribute to the man instrumental in setting up the Army Institute of Technology, an engineering college in which are enrolled children of armymen from all over India. General B.C.Joshi also was the first Chief of Army Staff to die in harness, and the quiz has been an excellent memory to his honoured name. The first edition began in 1998, in my First Year, and enjoyed a fair amount of participation despite what is AIT's greatest obstacle: their distance from the city. But the excellent organizational skills resulted in them providing transportation to the venue. Though sometimes the transportation did not extend to the reverse journey, it soon became quite apparent that it would be worth the bus/motorbike/van ride back.

They obviously had a lot of juniors in hostels at their disposal, who were put to work in various hospitality departments: the welcome, registration, paper distribution, even filling in empty seats if required! And they're still the only quiz that gives good refreshments, albeit only for the finalists!

BCJ's USP was the three-member team, all other quizzes here are usually for two members. Sadly, they've had to refrain from that since last year, which is quite a shame, but the declining numbers have forced that move. BCJ were also the first to introduce (at least in the local circuit) the use of computers to present the questions, in their inaugural year. They also heralded Owl-in-the-Bowl, a solo quizzing contest, that still continues to be an important sideshow to the main quiz.

Anand, Swap & Pandit from BVP won the inaugural year; Sujay & me made it to the final despite no third partner, and ended up 5th I think. The second year ended better with Sujay, Kunal & me (the three-member concept can help come up with new teams!) ending 2nd behind AFMC. George, Jitu & Salil came in third after us, putting a lot of COEP names on certificates. But that year's quiz was almost hijacked by events in Chennai where Sachin was threatening to pull it off against the Pakistanis despite all his back troubles. George boasted of a pager then, which would broadcast scores, and because of his complete apathy towards the game, we 5 (incidentally all us COEPians were sitting adjacent) were more worried about getting him to tell us the ever-intriguing score. Year 3 and the rules were modified to enable corporates,in particular, one person to qualify. George was no longer under the "student" column and now could get in with a team from Pspl. Whatever hopes Sujay, Salil & I harboured of winning against a seemingly weakened George & co. were put to rest when an unknown entity combined with George to pluck some unbelievable answers from nowhere. That unknown entity was Amit Gardé and Pspl won. Although they beat us by the smallest margin, the manner in which they did so was stunning. The fourth year turned out to be the ones in which we would stop being bridesmaids, in what would have been one of the toughest teams to turn out for BCJ (insert IMHOs here): Sujay, Harish & me. Unfortunately, a schedule mixup meant very little audience and an unnecessary (and painful) drama-cum-musical non-extravaganza. Swap, in his final year like us, made a last ditch effort worthy of his inagural champion status, but it proved a tad short. Harish became the first quizzer on the Pune circuit (since I've known it) to retain a quiz title, teaming up with Sammy (who won on home turf) in the first quiz in the new 2 member format last year. Just reiterating that it is a quiz worth the distance even if one wasn't participating: I did that last time, so I can say that.

A lot of credit must go to the AIT quizzers who conducted BCJ: in particular, Akshay Johar, The Big Four (Kapil Dahiya, Navneet Bal, Srikant Chander & Samrat Sengupta), Nikhil Lasrado and the new guard: Nitin Nair, Roshan et al. (Pardon if've left out anyone). They always strived to do the BCJ quiz in a manner befitting the occasion, and despite a few hiccups, have usually `managed to put up a good show. Here's to hoping this will carry on.

The General B.C.Joshi quiz will be conducted on the 9th of February at the Persistent Systems premises. The Owl-in-the-Bowl quiz is a part of the events this year too. Teams of two members. And I'm sure, good prizes as usual.

World Cup vignettes from The Guardian

*A ready (and lighthearted) reckoner to the elite panel of ICC umpires : here

*Old Mother Cricket is charged for sabotage

I like Aamir Khan's performances (I'm not a gushing fan, but I have come to expect a certain standard from him), so the following is just aimed to be a small criticism, not an accusation. Just thinking about the different (and acclaimed) performances he has given over the last few years, I felt the basic personality of the characters he was playing in them was pretty identical. Add to these, the different ad-spots he does for Coca Cola, which seem an extension of the same personality. I can grant him that maybe he has not received the roles that would defeat my criticisms, but I'm just basing this on the majority of the roles he has done so far. I may not be able to explain the crux of my argument well, the blame is entirely mine.

I have not watched Raja Hindustani, which I don't plan to unless I have to watch a double bill of that and Hum Aapke Hain Kaun?, if you get my drift. Nor have I watched Raakh, which I hopefully will some day.

The kind of characterization that Aamir Khan has had in many of his roles usually have him as the pro-active protagonist, not one who is introspective or brooding or reactive to situations. He usually is a smart-alec or atleast one who has the ripostes in the film. His character is usually overbearing, over others in the film. Even in his one role that had dark shades (1947-Earth), the role fits in more or less with the above descriptions. In short, he has not enjoyed the variety that he probably deserves. It doesn't matter if the role was a success or not, but the drastically different role has yet to happen to him. In that sense, his "much awaited" Mann (Current BC-ians would get that) was his only risky venture for it showed how much he would bend over to help his brother! Of course, he has shown flashes of emoting different emotions in the many films he has done, but nothing substantially different on the whole. Perhaps, with his productions, he might have more choice.

I've always maintained that it was a shame that stars like Amitabh didn't have the guts or perhaps the inclination to experiment with roles. But atleast in Amitabh's early years, he had the fortune of obtaining meaty or diverse roles from Hrishikesh Mukherjee in Anand, Abhimaan, Namak Haraam and even, for those who remember, Alaap. He could've made a difference in the 80s when his word was gospel, but didn't exercise that power. Much like Rajnikant these days. These supermegaultra stars seemed locked into a self-perpetuating cycle of the same plots that got them to the top. Hopefully, Aamir Khan will enjoy more dare-devilry in roles.

On a related note, I still find it hard to believe that Lagaan's Bhuvan was first offered to Shah Rukh Khan. Perhaps the other great friendship of Gowarikar led to that rather intriguing casting call, which Shah Rukh Khan declined then. Anyway, Shah Rukh & Gowarikar have their opportunity to show how it might've been with their newly announced Swades.

I've been a great TV watcher, much to the annoyance of a few people at times, but of late my TV watching seems to have been rather restricted; apart from movie-on-TV watching, I don't seem to have too many regular serials or other programming on my list these days. All of this in context of a little list I was making on my current most watched programmes: I wanted to come up with 10 and barely managed to do so. A decade ago, I would not have struggled so. Even though Doordarshan crashed out of our minds with the advent of cable TV, the decade before 1993 did have some rather good (in hindsight, sadly) serials to boast of. DD somehow tried to imitate cable TV offerings and lost its traditional strengths in conjunction with coming up with poor copies of countdown shows, film premieres etc. Anyway, a little list of my current I-try-and-view-if-I-can shows, not in any particular order:

1. Frasier : Star World - The travails of radio-psychiatrist Frasier Crane, brother Niles, father Martin, Daphne Moon, the invisible Maris, the hormonally-challenged Roz and a canine comic expert called Eddie. Shares directors with Seinfeld (Andy Ackerman for example), features celebrity voices (Chakravyuh 2001!) and has IMHO, the wittiest jokes on TV.
2. Harsha Online : ESPN/Star Sports - Hosted by the guy who, I think, has the best job in India. Harsha Bhogle knows a great deal not just about cricket but sport in general, and has a most interesting lineup of guests, the latest being Syed Kirmani. His guests seem most comfortable talking to him and the hour-long show is well-structured with no unnecessary frills.
3. Kondattam/Meendum Meendum Sirippu : Sun TV - I would've chosen Comedy Time if it still aired, I thought Mayilsami could teach a thing or two to all those cosmetic disasters they call hosts. Sun TV, as do most Tamil channels, air these shows that have comedy scenes (they can range from the sublime to the absolutely crude, but somehow the hope of watching a good one draws me back) from Tamil films: Goundamani & Senthil dominating. A post on this someday.
4. Trendmill, Storyboard : CNBC India - Good production values, excellent presentation even for people like me with little knowledge of business news. The programmes primarily focus on the Ad and media aspects of Indian business.
5. Seinfeld : Zee English - I still don't know why I like it (on a broad level). Sometimes, it's pretty childish, but sometimes one will get a gem. And that's worth waiting for. I even have a book on the Seinfeld episodes of the 1st 8 years. Jerry, Elaine, Cosmo & George beam at primetime into my house on weekends. And you too, Nuuu-mann.
6. Sportsline : Star Sports - Filled a long standing need to have a show dedicated to sporting news of the day. The show features a decent set of hosts who know their business well.
7. Mastermind India : BBC World - Probably not much of a surprise, but it is pretty much the only decent Indian quiz show on TV. Even if you're only watching reruns of two years before, because there is always the chance you might spot someone you know. Of course, there is always the danger of seeing me, but that's only 3 out of the 101 shows.
8. Shrimaan Shrimati : Sabe TV - This is probably another infra-dig choice, but I just like its manic madness. The reruns still appear and I watch them whenever I can. Keshav "Keku" Kulkarni (RIP), Kokila "Koki" Kulkarni, Prema Shalini, Dilruba "Dilbura" Jarnail Singh Khurana, Chintu, Sharmaji, Ganga "Gangaaa" Mausi and the ever reliable Gokhale have been a source of great amusement.
9. Ikke Pe Ikka : Zee Cinema - Must be one of the longest running shows on Indian TV. I've got a bit tired of Sajid Khan (and it's not a patch on Kehne me Kya Harz Hai), but the interest is more out of familiarity and a lack of anything else to watch.
10. Talking Movies : BBC World - Anchored by Peter Brook from New York, this is probably the only decent film discussion programme in the Indian satellite TV space. A substitute for Barry Norman's long running show, it still does feature a wide sweep of film reviews and related items eschewing the tabloid or fawning approach most Indian film shows seem to adopt.

Even a few years earlier, I've would been able to name some more names: Murder Call, the Australian crime series, springs to mind. The Balaji model has unfortunately made extinct the alternative programme space, or atleast pushed them to difficult viewing spots. Need a change soon.

A week ago, ESPN-Star Sports launched their Super Selector game for the World Cup. The show was anchored by Harsha Bhogle and had a unique touch: the presentation was in the original manner that Naseeruddin Shah used to host (The current show is anchored by Darain Shahidi & Poonam Sharma and has a vastly different look). It also was an excuse to bring back some of the original suspects: Naseeruddin Shah walked onto the sets after Sudhir Mishra's Apple Singh dialogues. More nostalgia with the addition of Sebi (Sabi? Sebby? Sabby?) and his band who were always exhorted by Shah to Take it away!. Navjot Singh Sidhu appeared do his bombastic bit as ever and Joy Bhattacharya had more defending to do of the statistics as usual. The biggest and most notable absentee was Pandit Ajay Bhambi, a big favourite among some of us. To give discredit where it is due, ESS were far more prescient about SET MAX's hobnobbing with Ma Prem Rithambara and her legerdemain with her tarot cards: Pt. Bhambi (enjoys more footage on Jain TV) would make predictions about which players would be likely to do well. How accurate he was with his marksmanship was evident in the ranking he achieved among the celebrity lists, he was quite consistently at the bottom. Apple Singh Mishra, to my mind, must be one of the luckiest guys (along with Gautam Bhimani): free trips to South Africa beckon. (Of course, it might not be all that rosy, but at least they're being offered a ride there!)