Rules vs. Humanity

''It was a cold wintery desert night. As we sped in our project jeep towards the village that I intended to work from for the next few days, our only guiding lights were the headlights since the villages in that area were yet not equiped with electricity. Suddenly from the dark emerged a man and hailed the jeep for a ride. As the driver slowed down, my heartbeat accelerated out of fear. Catching my look of incredulity, he smiled his rustic grin, and said what I was never to forget'' ghabraiye nahin, yeh shahr nahin hai (don't worry madam, this is not your city)'' and stopped the vehicle for the new traveller.

This, as I observed over the next few days, was an unspoken rule of the desert where for miles stretched nothing but the endless desert. Where the only landmarks or road signs were cactii or boulders differentiated by their shapes. Where a person would just spot the familiar cactus, get off the vehicle and dissapear into the desert as if by magic. There were no beaten tracks to follow. Here no traveller was ever refused a ride for otherwise he would have to travel for hours on foot to his destination. I often found myself sandwiched between grateful toothless grins, huge moustaches, tinkling bangles and shy glances but the aftertaste was always ''nice''. The human spirit, even without words, touches in a way that nothing else can. I never objected to his stopping the vehicle again, I had understood the unspoken law of the desert''.

This was six to seven years back, submerged in my subconcious as a memory...then why did I suddenly remember it now? An incident lately recalled it.

I was on a vacation to Rome a few days back. The hotel had arranged for a shuttle from the city centre as the hotel was not very well connected by public transport. It was late that day, and it was the last shuttle for the day. All the seats were occupied. No sooner had we started that we saw a guest from the hotel running after the bus. The driver saw him but didnot stop. The breathless boy managed to catch up at a traffic light, and pleaded to be allowed in since he had an early moring flight to catch. The driver did not permit it. 'Rules are rules', he said. 'You are late and also the seats are occupied'. The lights changed and we moved forward. As I turned to see that guy being left behind, standing amidst the moving traffic, I saw his expression..dismay, desperation, and something else...I shudderd to think if I would have been in his place. From where I saw it anybody would have been happy to share a seat with him, he was a guest at the same hotel after all...and yet ''Rules were rules, seats could not be shared''.

Suddenly I remembered my desert experience...no formal ''rules''.. just pure ''humanity''...Two extremes. I wondered if we will ever be able to strike a healthy steady balance between the two?

To be or not to be.....Vegetarian?

Have you ever been questioned on something that you have always taken for granted and found yourelf wondering about the answer or the explanation? Have you been surprised by the fact that the answer doesnot come immediately even though you were so sure that it would? More importantly have you found yourself questioning your own actions after you've been forced to think? It can either be a torture when you fail to find an explanation for something that you've been doing without questioning or an uplifting experience when your introspection end up providing you with a justification to your convictions.

Vegetarianism has always been a way of life for me. India and life in India doesnot question it. The land tolerates vegetarianism with equal ease as it tolerates non vegetarianism. Born and brought up in a veg household, vegetarianism was a way of life, and later when I grew my own wings, it became a conscious choice. The society allowed it to be...no questions asked.

Then life got me to the West...and the defination of food changed. ' Vegetables are a side dish, they cannot possibly consitute the main course?'' asked incredulous voices. ''What about the nutrition part?'' and most disturbingly came the defensive ''Why should one not eat non-veg?'' WHY?? and the desire to explain to my friends as cohesively as possible led me to some introspection myself.....

The most obvious answer is of course ''I do not want to kill to eat'' which despite being the truth left me uncomfortable for it seemed to be insinuating that all those who do eat non veg are cruel, and that is indeed not so. Some of my non veg friends happen to be better people than Iam. Even more so, the next defensive statement invariably is ''even plants have life, quit that too!'' Much as we would hate to admit it, there was reason to the words. So, what were the reasons for my convictions? Why did I still feel reluctant to go the non veg way? I wanted to be able to put them into words.

I realised as I observed other cuisines that there are hardly any vegetarian main dishes. Meat, fish etc then, for the western world, is not non vegetarian, IT IS FOOD!! THE ALL IMPORTANT FOOD! Within cuisines here in the west there is no option to go veg or non-veg.....this option is equivalent to choosing between eating or not eating! Converting to vegetarianism within the western cuisines would be like slow-suicide, and surely no life is to be frittered away thus. No wonder people in the west cannot understand our insistence on vegetarian diet.

I realised that it is perhaps only the Indian cuisine which has delightul vegetarian contents and combinations that allow people to go vegetarian, and yet stay healthy! Our rotis and dals have no western counterparts. Not that lentils and vegetables are not available in the west. However, it is our recipes, the right combinations of spices, and the right food combinations that allow us to manage so beautifully on vegetarian diets all our lives. Centuries of knowledge of ayurved, telling us the right combinations, and health aspects of various plants and spices are firmly ingrained in our cuisines and culture. It is this knowledge that has allowed India to survive without killing to eat. We are but perhaps the only culture which has managed this no mean feat! Hence, if one were to go totally vegetarian one must switch to the Indian or similar diet to be able to continue. However, this option is not viable always for people not used to Indian cuisine. Set- tastes are not easy to change. I remember finding certain varities of cheese (delicacies in the west !) extremely repulsive despite knowing their health value! Similarly, people who are not used to Indian tastes and spices might not like to switch to an Indian diet, even if in-principal they want to go vegetarian.

That gets me to MY reasons for being vegetarian (for finally after all the introspection it was clear in my head)....Iam vegetarian because ''I do not want to kill to feed myself...as long as (and this is important!) there are veg options, which thanks to my Indian kitchen are plenty''. The day I am left without any option but the non-veg option, perhaps I too will eat meat (perhaps!) for there is far too much to do in a lifetime than to starve oneself.

As for the argument that plants also have life....I believe that everytime a chicken shrieks when its neck gets twisted or a fish gasps for breath, it registers somewhere on our subconscious. We however, learn to ignore that plea for life to be able to feed ourselves and satisfy our greedy tastebuds.....well, plants do not cry out for help! Vegetarians hence can at least pacify themselves that their soul does not have to cringe at that cry of help, and then harden up nevertheless, in order to be able to feed themselves.

Slumdog Millionaire...the saga continues...

Should he or should he not? Should Danny Boyle be helping the star children cast of ''Slumdog Millionaires'' or not? What is the responsibility of the producers( raking in profits) to the subject/s who/which has enabled them the access to heights of fame and glory? Well what do YOU think? Does he actually owe them something? Lets start from the beginning.....

Mr. Danny Boyle directs a movies for which he shortlists not professional actors but children from slums...namely the children get an opportunity of a life time. Subsequently he pays them their fees, and releases the movie, which goes on to become a supersuccess. He makes sure that the children get to experience some of the glory and power that comes with success by taking them to the Oscars. A few months later amidst reports of the children being homeless, he comes back to make sure that the children and their families whose houses have been razed to the ground be suitably provided for.... What does he get in return? This…..''The child artists' father walks out in a huff accusing Boyle for not helping them enough'' a magazine reported, which makes one wonder '' HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH, afterall''??

Coming back to the question ''Does he owe them something?'' On technical and legal grounds, he owes them just their predetermined fees( which, of course, should be as per industry standards, and not exploitative). On moral grounds? A lot more. And to be fair to him, I think he is doing that. Its important to note that anything and everything that he is doing for the children now after all the contractual fees has been paid, should ideally be seen as an act of concern and compassion for the children, and should be encouraged for the sheer sake of morality. No legal power in this increasingly materialistic world of ours, bound by contracts and legal formalities can make him pay up beyond the predetermined fees...hence any move that he does now, to help, needs to be recognised and encouraged, and not thrown back on the face as ''not enough''. Compassion and concern have been known to die a sure -shot premature death when they come face to face with greed, which all the spiritual texts of old cry themselves hoarse calling ''an ever- growing out- of -control animal''.

Greed is but a natural fallout of desperation. A desperate man when given a chance clings to it, refusing to relinquish. Sometimes he wants to secure his entire future on the basis of that one opportunity because life had not given him any before....that's understandable. Rubina's(the child actor) father's act of asking for more is thus understandable. Understandable, but not justified....there is a fine line between the two...What might happen in the process, which happens all too often, is that any further similar compassionate moves by others might get discouraged cause nobody wants to borrow unpleasentness simply for wanting to help.

This is where neutral parties, non biased ones, need to come in. Balance, the key word needs to define the measures being taken. Danny Boyle needs to be careful, for success always come with its associated problems. He seems to be facing the full onslaught of basic human frailities here in the form of greed, desperation, even peer pressure(by western film fraternity for not doing enough for the poor) and ever increasing demands from the parents, which Iam afraid might threaten to drown out all remenants of compassion or gratitude that he might be feeling for the children. He I feel is trying to do the needful for whatever reasons, maybe compassion, maybe peer pressure. But what about the recepients, namely the child artists or rather their parents'? Are they doing the needful ?

I wish someone would help the parents of the children see the beauty, of the opportunity that has prsented itself to them, in forms other than materialistic. How many people get such opportunities? The celebration for being the chosen ones needs to be sustained through hard work and gratitude. This can be a stepping stone to better opportunities like good education for the children.Most importantly, this opportunity has given them a chance to dream …...But they need to understand that dreams can be realised only through hard work- sustained continous hard work, and cannot rest on merely one episode of glory- one cannot go on reaping its reward all one's life!

As some wise old man put it ''To give is to be great but to accept gracefully is sometimes greater.''

“Pareeksha”

I remember as a child I used to have nervous pangs before every exam and every major event. I remember crying before every such occurrence and my mother comforting me calmly. On one such teary occasion I remember telling her in between tears, how jealous I was of her comfortable environment and how I would love to be in her place and not face these uncertainities, namely exams!!. She just smiled quietly. I never really understood that smile. Anyway that exam went well and the matter came to a close.

College followed school and life was one big roller coaster ride. A secure home, loving parents, good friends, life was good. Career followed academics and soon walked in the knight in shining armour. Perhaps the first pang of insecurity was felt at “ vidaai”. Parents and the security that they offer had become a part of life, much taken for granted. Saying bye to them was a new and strange feeling that left a lump, but along with it came the adventure of a new life with ones partner and soon the lump was forgotten.

Then came motherhood and life changed completely. Two years passed beautifully. Life was full. Then one day came the suggestion “ its time to send him to the playschool”. I distinctly remember the jolt I felt on hearing it. It was perhaps the first time in the two years of inseparable existence that I realised that the child is an individual in his own right and not just an extension of myself. It was the first of the many times that I would have to separate him from myself in the future, so as to enable him to spread his wings and soar in his own sky… “would he be able to manage on his own? He doesn’t even speak properly, how will tell the teachers if he is thirsty, what if somebody hits him?” I could not be pacified. I was determined to look him all over for any cuts or bruises once he returned from school, I planned to feed him extra, my son would after all be using his energy at school, I decided to speak to the teachers everyday and not allow anybody to scold my child… etc. etc. The plans were never ending.

I don’t think I slept the night before his first day at school. We dropped him at school that first day and I forced myself to smile till the door closed behind me and then I howled. And as the tears free flowed, I suddenly folded my hands and prayed fervently with all my faith and belief. I prayed for all the difficulties, insecurities and hurdles in his path to come in my way and for him to have a smooth way ahead. I prayed to be able to take on all his difficulties. I really prayed that day. And just as I was praying with all my heart came unbidden to my mind a smile from my childhood. A “you’ll know it someday” smile. It was precisely that moment that I understood that smile. It was the smile of a mother whose heart was crying at her child’s misery but who would nevertheless swallow the lump, and smile for the fear of weakening the child otherwise.

The mother in me finally understood. I also understood that motherhood is that one test of life, that one “pareeksha” where however well you perform, that one word of real appreciation might take years in coming.... perhaps when your little kids get little kids of their own and realise your sacrifice but by which time you yourself are in the twilight of life.

My son came back from school very happy. He had discovered new friends, new toys, new life, and his mother had rediscovered her own mother all over again. Love you Ma and thank you.

PS: Today my mother lies bedridden with a broken hip and me sitting miles away has been forbidden by her to come to her aid for I will have to leave my little child behind. The mother in her continues to be first a mother, and then a patient, and I realise once again that one's debt to one's mother can never really be cleared.... It is perhaps one of the few debts that we should be grateful to God for and should bask in its glory for as long as we can. If there is anything called a soul...then today I thank my mother from the deepest core of my soul and pray for her quick recovery and health.

Celebrity Adoptions

As I hear about celebrity adoptions, namely celebrities wanting to adopt children from developing countries one after the other, I wonder what their purpose is after all? Is it genuine love or is it merely wanting to make a statement? Is it genuine desire to have that child call you Ma and Pa or is it something else? Even if it is a genuine desire to have a large family, are all desires justified in themselves irrespective of the context they are in?

Anybody who has even one child knows what it entails to be able to give that child a right balance of time, freedom education etc...and for both the parents to have a career as well, can be a real test at times....Gone are the days of huge broods, for extended families no longer exist, and if nannies could do all that parents are required to do then the very institution of family is doomed even before it has started emerging again.....

…...........and most importantly where do the adopted children stand in all this? Is adoption by a celebrity a guarantee of a non complexed childhood, is luxury the only prerequisite to growing up to be a sound adult? Obviously not, for otherwise we would not be having so many spoilt brats lacking love in the lap of luxury. If as a parent there is one reality that I acknowledge with all my heart, it is that the most important prerequisite to being a good parent is to give your child your time, in a fine balance of quality and quantity, the other prerequisites come later...

Adoption is no doubt a good deed. But dear friends, a good deed for wrong reasons doesn't remain a good deed anymore, it becomes a confused deed. Couples before adopting a child need to have their priorities straight, for nobody has the right to play with a young life. There can be any number of outlets for high ambitions, a number of outlets for excess money, number of outlets for wanting to do good deeds ( donations to orphanages or sponsoring children for example) but there can be no excuse for adopting a child for any reason except total sincerity, time and love. Adoption, just like giving birth is a huge responsibility, consequences of which go far beyond the tangible. It is a 'karma' which when goes wrong can lead to horibly twisted destinies and lives, but to a better world, if it goes right.

My advice to people wanting to adopt (celebrities especially for rules especially get broken when they are involved) '' Do not make a joke of adoption or parenthood...its a crime far worse than we can imagine. Understanding the concept of family goes far beyond the size of family. Give a child your name or get her into this world only when, if need be, you are ready to give up everything for that little one....and if thats too high a price to pay.... be sensible! and lead your life sensibly with whatever you have. Do not add to, what you cannot do justice to''.

The Perfect Solution!!

When God blessed us with brains, he perhaps wanted a good laugh, for laugh he must when we, in full utilisation of our brainy assests, choose to make difficult even the most simple of things. Now look at the recent 'furore' over Mahatma Gandhi's possesions being auctioned. A multidollar question ''would the Mahatma have approved of the expenditure on his possesions?'' but of course not, he wouldn't have. He believed in ideals not possesions but then dear friends, there is a difference between a great man placing himself on a pedestal and we, his followers doing the same. While the former would be vanity the latter is inspiration.

Also it is important to remember that striking a balance between what we think is right, and what the world thinks is right is of upmost importance. We live in a society, in a world, and cannot ignore its expectations from us. To let go of the mahama's possesions would perhaps be right ideologically but is it not completely opposed to what is expected of us by this world which is, as it is, viewing India's rise with sceptisicm. Are we once again ready to let go of our heritage simpy because we are too confused with ideologies, only to start claiming that heritage back once the West starts patenting it as theirs? The money for the possesions did not go from funds allocated for some development initiative. They were a gift to the nation from somebody who could afford that gift. A better gift than being spent by politicians on their birthdays!!

I viewed the results of the auction with a deep sense of satisfaction. We did strike a balance after all. Balance between world expectations of us as a nation and righteousness. We were capable enough as a rising nation to claim something that was special to us. That one is for the World, 'duniyadaari' as we might say in India. To give it back to the nation without asking a price for it, thats for righteousness. Mahatma, I think would have approved after all.

slumdog or hotdog?

Slumdog or Hotdog?

When the Slumdog ( my friend's 9 year old daughter chooses to call it hot dog...its hot news, afterall!!) controversy broke out with stalwarts writing about it, me, the ordinary Indian decided to pitch in too....perhaps someone somewhere is interested in the common man's views......

Lets start from the beginning, from the first reaction to the subsequent ones. To be very frank, my first reaction to comments on the film being a peddlar of ' glorification of poverty' was incredulity. Its just a film after all, its bound to be inspired by something or the other, in this case something being 'Slums of India and a novel set in the same', but subsequently over a period of time, I too could not help but be aggrieved by what I saw my friends from west conjuring about India through their impressions from the film. It hurt, for anybody who knows India knows that though slums are a reality, they are not the only reality. However the film is not just for people who already know India, its also for people who are getting to know India only through films like this or books like 'The White Tiger'. Their pathetic impressions of India hurt alright. There is a lot more to India and being Indian, I wanted to say but who cares to listen to me? Iam not an oscar winner after all !

So, well, am I to be blamed for being a split personality, of not being able to acknowledge the truth of poverty etc.etc in my land? The thought bothered me a lot, and I sat down to fathom it all out, in my mind of course...the safest place of all nowadays...

Poverty and its depiction are nothing new. International humanitarian organisations like UN etc. too talk of Indian poverty all the time, they showcase it all the time and nobody minds, why? The answer gets me to the core of the problem, at least in my eyes. The purpose of an act defines the merits or the demerits of that act, to a large extent. Nobody minds a UN depiction of poverty because its all for a good cause....... but when depiction of somebody else's poverty is for reasons other than humanitarian, the responses can be quite different depending upon the context.

' All in the name of creative freedom' too is also perfectly justifiable, and that, incidently may be all that Danny Boyle was doing when he set out to make the film- a good subject, good treatment and thus an extremely enjoyable film. Period. However, it didn't stop at that did it? When the same film starts being touted as a mirror of Indian society by the ignorant West or vested Indian interests, its time to speak up. There is a fine line between exploration and exploitation of sensitive issues like poverty, handicaps, cultural differences etc. and this line is often crossed by one and many in the name of politics, humor or even creative liberties. A bit more of sensitivity may go a long way in restoring dignities which sometimes get trampled upon during people's personal quests.

Also as I read blogs and comments in Indian media lameting the poor portrayal of India, I wondered where has our good old Indian tolerance gone? They said ''People living in ivory towers do not have a right to talk about poverty...'' Why may I ask? If people in ivory towers cannot critique or talk about issues regarding slums, then by that standard all our ministers, scribes and do-gooders who wish to talk about similar issues, should be living in slums, right? But they don't do they? People who have done well for themselves through hard work need to be appreciated and applauded for their efforts, not barred from commenting on issues which plague their society simply because they have managed to rise above it. India needs to remember and renew its heritage of tolerance, I feel.

Let us leave 'Slumdog millionaire' to be what it set out to be...an interesting film which deserves all the artistic accolades that it has received. Neither is it a mirror to Indian society nor a matter of national shame..sil vous plait.