The Bigger Battle

Every hour I get new updates of the gruesome gang-rape case in Delhi. Every new bit of information seems to add to the horror of the event. Protests are abound, options for elevating safety are discussed in the parliament, and ways to punish the perpetrators discussed widely on social media. At the other end of the world, a nation reels as 20 children younger than 10 are shot by a gunman on an incomprehensible killing spree. Two acts, difficult to pick which one is worse. But a common theme seems to emerge.

Just as the US parliament debates that taking guns away from people may not be the true solution to repeated occurrences of such crimes, increase of safety and justice to the victim are necessary but not sufficient to bring this national shame to an end.

As the dignitaries discuss in their boardrooms what steps to take, I feel that common people like you and me have a big role to play. Not by going on Facebook and Twitter and expressing disgust, outrage, although I do not mean to say that is unfounded. But by fundamentally changing our outlook towards women in society. If you want to change the world, start by organizing your closet. So here goes a short list of what I feel we must change. The 'we' is emphasized. It is the responsibility of not only men, but women, and children, and parents.

Stop treating sex as taboo

I think this is the most vital step. Throughout India (and a greater part of the world), society is rife with the ill-prudence of keeping sex a hush-hush affair. Parents won't discuss it, teachers discourage it. If I could slap a label on the faces of all these people, it would have hypocrite written over it.

Everybody wants sex. Everybody needs sex. The sooner you accept this, the better. Repressing this fundamental urge incubates a monster in us, men and women alike.

If you are a parent, please stop praying to make nuns and angels of your children. Please stop handholding your teenagers through vulnerable hormone surges. Instead, talk to your children about how to have sex responsibly, to use protection, to avoid diseases. Support live-ins. If your child is old enough, do not divert the TV channel when it flashes news of rape cases - talk to your kid about why this is unacceptable behavior. Uncomfortable as this may sound, this is the only way. Nothing else is going to work. And the outcome will only be worse. From abortions to rapes, you are unknowingly sowing the seeds by not confronting truth head-on.

If you are a young adult, please seek to learn from those who have experience, from a reliable source that cares about you. Not from a random website or a blog. Information that is too free is perhaps equally unreliable. And yes, "bindaas bol.. condom!" Stop being ashamed, be responsible. Your muteness will result in much more shame than you can imagine.

If you are the government, think again about legalizing porn and prostitution. In your attempts to create a "pure" society, have you actually led the path to a worse one? I understand it is a sensitive issue. I understand unwilling victims are trafficked into prostitution, and that requires a crackdown. We have to draw a line. But that line cannot be at zero.

And if you are the media, please stop peppering pointless item songs in movies. By repeatedly displaying a woman as marketable material, not only do you disrespect them, you show them in similar light to the men of the society: meat.


Women are not from Mars

"Kya be, ghar me maa behen nahi hai kya?"

The old adage. Have you ever thought erotically about the fat saree-clad woman? Or your mom, in extension (I know some do, but its pretty rare)? Truth is, rarely do we think ill of the women we see every day. Exchange that for a girl in a top and a tight pair of jeans. Add leather boots and long hair. Make her blonde and fair for good measure. Ooh-la-la, right?

No, my point is not to dictate how women should dress. Au contrare, this is how most real women in the world actually dress. But in our society, we have been relegated to think that respectable (read: non rape-worthy) women dress conservatively. And if its otherwise, it looks so foreign, so different to us, that inherently we feel this is outside our set of defined morals. This is a whole new bird altogether, therefore it is OK to think lecherous.

You and I can overcome this simply by getting used to it. By accepting that women are not from Mars. That beautiful and attractive women live, work and walk among us, alongside us. That we can be friends with them, talk to them just as freely as we would to a friend of the same sex. That there is nothing wrong in our mothers or teachers wearing 'modern' clothes. We need to set our definitions of normal straight.

And if you are a young girl or a parent of the same, please stop running and hiding from guys. Do you ever see kids around 5 years of age treat girls or boys any differently? By repeatedly advertising that you are some alien object, you encourage men to think of women as objects to be hunted down and conquered, not befriended.


Would you marry a raped girlfriend?

I could not have put it more clearly than the header question. Would you? If not, why? And if this was a guy who had a rape charge on him, would you sun him outright, or would you first ask the question "Was he proved guilty?"

More than half of rape victims do not end up injured fatally in a hospital. Most suffer minor physical injuries. The brunt of the blow is emotional, and it is exacerbated by our society's attitude towards a raped woman : "Iski to zindagi barbed ho gayi". In raw-but-honest words, she is 'second hand material' now.

Are kyun bhai? Aurat ki izzat koi chaadar nahi hoti hai ke yun uthaya aur phek diya.

Stand beside those who suffer or have suffered. Give them the feeling that what they went through was a crime whose justice will be meted out, and beyond that everything is, and can be restored to normal. The more you press on the fact that they were raped, the more you keep reminding them that somehow, they are not like us anymore. Its like they have been branded to be different. And this causes the biggest blow and trauma. From family to neighbors to media and women's rights commissions, we are all part of this same game.

And the implication goes beyond that. Is it because any involvement with a rape is so shamefully marketed in society that bystanders refuse to be involved? Is this why people do not rush to help, fearing for a similar label to be placed on their foreheads? Think about it.

 

Is it really, really equal?

Lastly, I put forward this statement to women in particular. If you want to be treated equally, stand up for it everywhere. Everywhere. Including cases where you are in advantage.

Why do you not hate seats reserved for women on public transport? Why does it not bother you to be paid equally in a job for less hours put in? Do you mind when you are promoted for being a "woman leader"? Do you refuse to be interviewed as the "woman topper" in board exams?

If you hue-and-cry when you are at the receiving end, please stand up for your rights of equality when you enjoy an advantage as well. No developed country treats women as any different from men. Chivalry and manners may have their place, but that cannot be a general rule of society. By accepting such favors, you indicate, fundamentally, that you are weak. Or that you support equality as long as you are on the winning side. That is not justice. Stand up and face hardship. Earn your respect, do not receive it through charity. Then, only then, will men acknowledge you as equals.


I believe in the power of society and community. I believe that together we can change something. I believe that there is hope. Lets join hands.

Wreck it Once More!

NB. Special thanks to Pulkit Anand. Both for inspiration and the prerogative.

NB2. If you have not seen this already, I insist that you rush to the nearest theatre.

-----

Its been a while since I have watched a really satisfying animation movie. The year so far brought Brave, and then Hotel Transylvania. Both were good, don't get me wrong. But when you come out of the theatre, it has a small time constant of decaying out of memory. Something was missing. Something kept it from being special.

And now, Dreamworks has overcome that hurdle and given me the animation movie of the year (there are a couple more to come around Christmas though).

I have one major complaint about Wreck it Ralph. It is perhaps the most under advertised, and maybe even misadversitised animation movie in quite some time. The name itself lacks the 'ting' factor (unlike Monsters Inc or UP). Plus, if you have caught the posters along the sidewalk… well well, lets say that most of the posters I saw had characters who had nothing more than a cameo role in the movie. And the one which did have the key characters.. umm.. said kind of nothing.

Nothing about how awesome the movie really is. Which brings us to the good part.

First and foremost, five stars for imagination. To conceive of arcade game characters as behind-the-screen employees, and to show a world of their own - I might have expected that off Pixar, but Dreamworks just blew my mind away on this one. The way visuals (especially the track of the car race - ooh racing through an ice cream field!!) brought this alive was beyond any expectations.

The second, and perhaps most awesome part, is the story itself. I won't spoil it for you here. But suffice it to say, (other than the cameo guys) every person you see on the screen has a purpose, and everything is beautifully knit into one perfect story. 

When it comes to the emotional fuzzy part, Dreamworks has usually been way behind Pixar for years. You kind of feel it here too, but parts of it are amazing. As a complete side story, the romance between (if you were expecting Ralph and the kiddo, slap yourself perv) Fix-it Felix and Sergeant Calhoun is the most unlikely-yet-touching piece of the puzzle. Especially I loved the scene where Felix happily volunteers to be sucker punched and face wrecked by the Sergeant (thanks to his fixing hammer). And oh my is Calhoun hot!

I could go on and on, and give away the whole story, but I wont. This is one of those movies you deserve to treat yourself (and your family) to. So please, go and watch it. You will not regret it for even a second.

If money did not matter

This is what I am writing about:

http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=448877845163126

To summarize, my wife is very excited about the prospect of a world where money is not important. The video preaches graduating students to pick a career they really like, and stick with it, regardless of the money. It goes on to support this point by saying how useless it would be to live your life doing something you don't like just for the sake of money, and how we are teaching our kids all the wrong things. 

My wife is a little angel. She believes in and represents all that is good in the world, especially to me, day in and day out. She sees the best in things, hopes for the best, and goes out of her way to bring out the best in me. God bless her little soul.

While the video is very noble in spirit, I have my concerns regarding it. I would illustrate this under two cases.

First, let us consider I want to be educated, be successful and become a big shot. Well, that does not seem to the the target audience of the video per se, so I might be going amiss here. It is queer that all noble videos seem to be directed at people who are unsure of what they want to do, and definitely not ambitious. If this applies to a fraction of people of the world, it cannot be a general principle at the outset. But leave that aside.

So I want to be educated. How much education is good enough? Well, a bachelor degree today gets you barely anywhere (yes, other than becoming a painter or a poet for sure, but thats not what I intend). So I need a masters. Or a doctorate. Maybe add a postdoc to that. Or maybe a medical degree. Add an MBA for good measure. Which of these courses come without a hefty fee? (Well you don't technically pay in a PhD, but then somebody is paying for you, so you can't say money is not important. Trying doing a PhD out of your pocket, including those who 'really like to do a PhD'). But then my parents were noble people who did whatever they liked with no regard for money. Guess what - I have nothing to pay for my education. End of story. I don't get to do what I really really like.

Ok now lets imagine I don't want to be a big shot. I am the ideal non-ambitious fellow. I am happy sitting in a meadow painting sunflowers. Question - will I earn enough? Well, I don't care for money, so thats that. Fair enough. What about my family? What about my aging parents, my wife, my kids? Who pays for their hospital, school and nuances? These statement are easy to make when you are born in America and raised in the land of individualism. Sadly it does not work that way for many of us. Or then you might conclude that you should neither care about money nor your family. Let them fend for themselves. In that case, I drop all allegations right away.

So neither being ambitious nor being mellow helps me get away without caring about money.

Whats the point then? Yes, money matters. If it did not, millions of people would not get up and run every morning. People would be happily singing in fields, riding horses, making merry. In short, people would not be productive.

Its a different question as to whether you enjoy your job. Many people are stuck doing a job that they don't wholly like to earn something. If not for themselves, then for the ones they care about. If this process is taking up ALL of your time and energy, then yes its probably a bad job to do, and you should look elsewhere. But its luxury and fantasy to think everybody has the means, access, resources and opportunity to anything they like. Such people are called irresponsible in my books. 

One Day in the Electronics Class

Something I wrote a long long time back.. in 2nd year .. :)

                           One Day in the Electronics Class

[A lecture hall… students are engaged in various activities… some are sleeping, some are chatting, some eating, etc…

A young, active-looking professor hurriedly walks in…]

Prof:    (Looks around and is disappointed by the general state of the students…. Starts                       pacing around the room….)

(One group of students are chatting…)

Prof:    YOU! Reduce your noise levels…

(One boy is sleeping….)

Prof:    YOU! Please wake him up….

(One boy is eating… seeing the prof coming, he quickly disposes his plate below the seat)

Prof:    What was that??? This is a class, not a semiconductor sample that you are adding       impurities!! Go outside and throw it in the Common Drain.

(Some people are copying assignments)

Prof:    YOU! Stop this communication system immediately. And one of you act as the                Common Collector and submit everybody’s assignment.

(Most fall silent… faint noise of 2 girls giggling)

Prof:    YOU! Bypass your small signals to AC ground… we have serious work to do…

(Prof goes to the dais and adjusts his microphone…)

Prof:    Students, today we shall….

(Common Collector submits the assignments… Prof takes a look)

Prof:    ALL the answers are wrong… Surprisingly everybody got the same wrong answer…          who is the Common Source??

(Students grumble at a particular guy… Prof notices)

Prof:    Stand up… you… yes YOU…

(Common Source stands up)

Prof:    So… you are a member of the Assignments and Tutorials Core Team??

CS:       (Puzzled and scared…) No, sir …. I mean…

Prof:    You have made the commonest mistake… and furthermore like an Ideal Current                        Mirror you have inducted the same mistake in everybody’s solution…

CS:       (Ashamed…) I am sorry Sir … could we try the problem once again…?

Prof:    It’s no good… instead study well the whole lot of you… otherwise your grades will        come in PDF format…

CS:       (Halufied…) Umm… our grades shall be mailed to us Sir?

Prof:    NO IDIOT, you will get P or D or F!! Sit down!!!

(Resumes Lecture)

Prof:    Today we shall be discussing the MOSFET circuit analysis. This is a very important        topic…

(2 students enter)

Prof:    Hey! You don’t ask for permission?

(Puzzled, students stop midway and look at the prof)

Prof:    What is the technical explanation for this delay?

Student 1:      Sir my cycle tyre punctured…

Student 2:      Sir I come by his cycle…

Prof:    SO… you 2 work in series, eh? If one component fails then your whole system                 crashes? Think fault-tolerant guys… (to Student 2) get a new cycle… go sit down.

            As I was saying, in these circuit analysis problems we shall assume all MOS’s to be    in saturation. Of course this must be verified at a later….

(One student is desperately trying to borrow a pen)

Prof:    YOU! What are you doing??

Student:         Sir I forgot to bring a pen…

Prof:    And where do you intend to write… I don’t see a notebook…

Student:         Sir I shall borrow a few pages…

Prof:    And have you submitted the assignment?

Student:         Sir I borrowed it from the Common Source (eyeing the guy)

Prof:    Brilliant! Now borrow yourself from your seat and without any intermediate                   collisions transport yourself out of the lecture hall… NOW! OUT!

Prof:    (calling after the guy) And on your way out close the Common Gate.

Prof:    Yes… amplify your attention please… as I was saying… the first step shall be a DC analysis of Q-pt values…

(One boy and one girl peep into the class)

-       “Sir may we come in?”

Prof:    New electron-hole pair!! You are too late… go back and recombine.

            Students, due to these stupid delay blocks riddled into our class, today I shall take a 2 hour lecture…

(Students grumble…)

Prof:    Why?

Student:         Will there be a break?

Prof:    No it is the prof who needs the break…

Students:       PLEASE SIR!!!!!!!

Prof:    Ok… but the mean free time shall be negligibly small… I intend to finish this chapter today…. And oh yes, you have a class test tomorrow…

Students:       OH NO!!!!!!

Prof:    Now what? Even this is exceeding your Upper Cut-off??

Students:       We need some time to study Sir…

Prof:    Electronic systems are supposed to give instantaneous output… I am sorry it can’t be   helped.

Now enough… fine tune your receivers… I shall radiate information and you better receive it fast…

(Students grumble and chatter… a general commotion settles in, when one of the staff comes in, paper in hand)

Prof:    SHUT UP! There is an important announcement… the HOD demands everybody               whose cycle has been left in the NO-PARKING zone to be subjected to Chain Therapy.

Students:       (Puzzled…) Chain Therapy???

Prof:    Yes… their cycles will be detained by department-sponsored chains and locks…

(Few students look around in dire urgency…)

Prof:    This had to happen…. Your disobedience has exceeded the HOD’s signal handling                   capacity… he has run into saturation trying to tell you… but you chose to remain in   cut-off mode… now with punishment, maybe you will re-stabilise your operating                       points. I am off to implement the strategy…

Students:       So the class is off?? YO!!!!

Prof:    There is nothing to celebrate… we shall have the class test today instead…

(Prof snaps his fingers… 2 TA’s walk in… hand out question papers…

Prof walks out …. Students collapse back with a big OH NO!!!!!!)

                                                                                                                        THE END

So long, and thanks for all the fish

So the JEE is in mortal danger. At this point when each of students, faculty and management are busy voicing their opinions, I was wondering whether we are even asking the right questions.

The stakeholders in this game are (a) the students (b) IITs (c) society. It is queer to note that ministry and management are not first level stakeholders by any measure. They are supposed to 'represent' the society in this equation, but given that they seemed to have stopped listening and are coming up with brilliant ideas all on their own, lets cast them aside.

So what do each of the stakeholders really need? Lets start backwards.

Society needs 'qualified engineers, scientists and leaders' to serve the nation. How does the process of changing the JEE format answer that need? Once you think about this, you'll realize that the connection is not at all obvious. The ministry supposes that by changing the format of the exam they will be able to induct students 'with a genuine love for engineering' into the elite institutions, which will end up serving the aforesaid purpose since they wont be deviated towards alternative career distractions (read 'white collar') which has been the growing trend. 

Both these assumptions are highly dubious and debatable. Firstly, at a +2 level, rarely anybody knows that they are 'genuinely interested in engineering' - I never did, and neither did hordes of my friends. At best, students know that they love basic sciences. Society-defined status quo and peer pressure, coupled with the utter lack of world class institutions for undergraduate basic science education (with due respect to the few St Xavier's, Presidencies and Annas scattered in a discombobulated manner) dictates that such students take up engineering or medicine as a career. I would like to know what process can filter out students who were 'born to be engineers' with a high level of confidence, especially in India where high school education is deeply theoretical and only a small fraction of students engage in science fairs, modeling projects and the like (note - no ministry ever thought of looking into that as a background).

As for the point of lateral attrition, it is worthy of note that the students 'genuinely interested in engineering', especially from IITs, end up pursuing graduate studies in foreign shores (read USA) and more often than not settle there. Those who do stay back suffer from a lack of challenging and rewarding 'core engineering jobs' within the country. No wonder that large numbers of them switch tracks to finance or management in order to earn well and live respectably while staying within India. The ministry does nothing to promote jobs and RnD, and pushes off-the-shelf resolutions without even an attempt at getting the appropriate ground work started.

Now what do the IITs (aka, hopefully, faculty) need? Having been through the system, the IITs actually need very little by way of undergraduates. The current process inducts students who have been through such a rigorous process of training that they end up being successful almost regardless of anything else. From personal experience, I know that the students who topped the JEE will continue to do the same regardless of the format. These students are not dumb you know. You change the format and they will adapt within days. Especially when the stakes are as high as being admitted into the only chain of undergraduate colleges in India known on a first-name basis throughout the world.

What IITs really need today is a drastic increase in the focus on research. While IITs have made a formidable reputation in undergraduate education, one has to squint to evince their presence in post-graduate studies. It is of immense import that the M.Tech and PhD students graduating out of IITs actually end up working in the IT industry and faculty positions across the nation. If the ministry were to do anything about increasing the output of quality engineers into the Indian workforce, this should be the stream they should attack first. Better resources, collaborations, industry liason, meaningful and productive research translating into stories of success and impact. To me, the fact that this crucial hinge has been all but overlooked is deeply disturbing. 

Finally the students. Students are much smarter than you think. They easily realize that the door to the IITs is synonymous to financial stability, social respect and professional success in India as well as the world. While the prudes may groan at students using the 'IIT stamp' to get places, I do not see how they are to blame given that the IITs are among the only universally recognized colleges from India across the world, and an almost lack of RnD in India. So while it might sound very sympathetic to 'reduce the stress of examinations', one cannot forget what is at stake is worth a whole lifetime. For that, students are NOT going to relax even if the entrance is made easy, but will only fight harder to shine above the rest of the populace. If the ministry thinks including school scores will make a difference, students will only reorient themselves to ace both (personally, board exams were a joke after the preparation we went through for JEE). Throw what you will, the best of the crop will adapt themselves to find their way. The ministry is making the crucial mistake again of expecting mediocrity out of a chain of institutions clearly set aside for elitism, and for all their efforts, students will only sing back 'so long, and thanks for all the fish'. 

I now pronounce you husband and husband

So the latest news is in. Obama loves you in pairs. Irrespective of how you pair up. In a recent highly debated political issue, Obama came out stating his support for gay marriage. Purportedly in his 2008 campaign he had taken the opposite stand. Other evidence suggests that even before that he has voiced his support in a signed legislature, but later denied.

Question - why is this at all a political issue? I mean, as far as I am concerned, this is a no-brainer. I am not homosexual, but I have totally nothing against them. If there are people who feel affection and love for others of the same sex and would rather spend their lives with them - sure, let them. Why are we so bothered?

Well if you think again, it is not difficult to see why it IS an issue. For one, as a political personality, you, strictly speaking, do not have the right to voice your personal opinions. You are a representative of the people, and have to say what they want you to say. After all, that is only democratic. So over the years, campaigners, including Obama possibly in 2008, voiced his opinion against homosexual marriage. The people, the society wanted it, and so he sided with it. "Its nothing personal, its only business" - to quote Michael Corleone.

So what is the key issue? Is it the love of office which prevents leaders from taking a strong stand towards what rationally seems to be right? Are people sacrificing what they know is right (hopefully) just to win public support, and in that case does it count as hypocrisy? Well, yes and no. Sure, its not the best reflection on your personal conscience. But then again, as a representative, you have to say what the people want you to say, that is the hallmark of a statesman - at the cost of possibly silencing his own opinion. 

Then, it works out, the key to the problem works down to the people themselves. Who oppose homosexual marriage? Possibly the Catholic, the religious, the conservative. Ok. I wonder why though. What is a good reason for them to protest against it? Stop the "sin against God" nonsense please and give me a good scientific reason. At least tell me it is "naturally unnatural" since it is not targeted towards procreation, or tell me that its a social thing where you feel uncomfortable living in the vicinity of two girls who you know kiss more than each other's lips. 

Now is the big question. So what? Nobody comes and checks on what you do behind closed doors in your bedroom. Whether you are vanilla or indulge in the exotic kinks now so popularized on the internet that you would think its more the norm than the exception. If you have the right to have a private personal life, what problem do you have with others? Why do you want to dictate what they are allowed to or not allowed to do in their nuptial bonds?

Society as a whole is in the need of growing up. This applies not only to "third world" and "developing" countries, but equally so in the USAs and Australias of the world. People, despite their apparent education and advanced philosophy, are yet to embrace the fundamental concepts of emotional, social and sexual liberation. For now, the issue hangs in the balance of what you think is right, and what IS right. 

The Plague of Management

For the first time, this is not an original post. I reprinted this from The Hindu, March 7 2012 edition in an article titled What they don't teach you at Indian B-schools by Baba Prasad, CEO, Vivékin Group & Visiting Professor of Management, IIIT-Hyderabad. 


Its a wonderful article that deserves attention.

This last Sunday, I watched a show on CNBC called Lessons in Marketing Excellence . Essentially, it featured the final round of a competition for B-School students across India conducted by CNBC and Hindustan Unilever Limited. The four finalist teams were asked to address the problem of how to help the Indian Railways innovate. As the bright students in their dark suits made their presentations, they unwittingly offered several lessons for why we lack innovation and leadership in India. The show especially provided an ironic commentary on how the education we provide in Indian business schools and the general eco-system of Indian business are boxing us in and curtailing even a tendency to innovate.

Lack of original Indian thinking

Almost 15 years ago, I had just graduated from Wharton and was cutting my teeth as a young B-School professor at Purdue University. Pankaj Chandra (a fellow-alum of Wharton although many years my senior) who was at IIM-A (and is now Director of IIM-Bangalore), invited me to a conference on operations management that he was organising in India. I accepted but had to cancel out at the last minute. However, a senior colleague at Purdue went and, when he came back to the U.S., I asked him how it had gone. He told me that he was struck by the fact that both in methodologies and in applications, the conference was completely West-oriented. The only presentation that had Indian “roots,” he said, was a paper that discussed how to optimise scheduling idli -cooker operations in a Bangalore Darshini restaurant. It is sad that more than a decade later, the same disease plagues our B-Schools and, consequently, our management thinking in the business world — a lack of original Indian thinking. I am hardly advocating a B-school version of Indian nationalist sentiment, but one must surely pause to ask if we are teaching our students to reject a language they know well and to instead put on a voice and idiom that they only half-know.

People and Colour

When one imagines India, the highlights are universal: People and Colour. Does it signify anything for our business world that the B-School students, including women, were without exception dressed in dark “business” suits? Where were the bright colours that India exudes? Dark business suits perhaps proclaim one's arrival into an elite club. But throttling ties and stifling suits are also metaphors for the dark state of management education and thought in India in particular, but generally all over the world. As we seek to close the door on such closeted-thinking, Shashi Tharoor's Hindi-practising colonialists ironically present a solution: To say “ Darwaza band karo ,” they practised “There was a banned crow!”

Why do I call these presentations symptoms of the stifled innovation and struggling strategy that is dogging Indian business? One of the central questions of the Indian Railways case that the students analysed was: “How does IR innovate to generate revenues, build capacity and increase market share?” Or as the show host put it, “Suggest innovative strategies to increase revenues for the Railways.” Look at the presentations and the solutions that the students put forth after one whole month of research. Why wasn't there even one bit of colour in what was supposed to be a marketing presentation? Of course, when I say colour, I use it symbolically to imply freshness in thought. Again let me make it clear — I do not hold only the students responsible for the wan thinking. In fact, we — management educators and stuffy sultans of strategy in the corporate world — are the ones who have brought this about. Did we see one video of a train compartment; hear one audio interview of a passenger, or an employee? No. These presentations evicted colour, but they also evicted the sense of people that is India. Instead of exploiting the aesthetic resonance of train travel, we heard long-winded statements in boring voices from behind tall podiums. Why? Because we have taught them that that's the way to be leaders. In this country, of all places, we seem to have forgotten the power of storytelling and the rich repertoires we possess. And we call these shows “Lessons in Marketing Excellence.”

The solutions proposed also primarily fed off the data in the case and worked at marginally increasing revenues from the operations. One team suggested that the addition of a new class between Second Class and 3-Tier AC would generate additional revenue because Second Class passengers would choose the newly introduced class that was higher-priced. The Railway officials on the panel of judges dismissed it saying that when they introduced 3-tier AC between 2-tier AC and Second Class, rather than Second Class passengers opting to go up to 3-tier AC, 2-tier AC passengers opted to go down. Another team proposed looking at three Indias — India-1, India-2, and India-3 — in terms of paying power, and suggested a focus on India-1. Promptly the Railway executives said that ignoring the largest and least wealthy India-3 category would not fit into the mission of the railways. In short, solutions like these kept bumping against the fact that the Indian Railways has both a social mission and a business vision. Such solutions focused only on milking existing operations, and consequently were only incremental. The point is that there was no demonstration of any out of the box thinking. While the team from FMS did propose a few refreshing, although small alternate streams of revenues, it is telling that they did not win the competition.

Alternatives

Ok, let's take a step back and ask ourselves another question: In what other way could the students have approached the Indian Railways case given to them? Let's start at the basics. What strikes me most about Indian Railways is the consistency with which they have maintained the design of the train and the architecture of the railway station. If Mahatma Gandhi came back and looked at the Indian train today, he would not find it very different from the ones in which he travelled across the country about a hundred years ago. And they certainly haven't changed much from the trains I used to take several decades ago as a young school kid going for the summer holidays from Mumbai to my grandparents' house in Tumkur, near Bangalore. How would it have been if the students had started with thinking about how to change the basic structure of the compartment? Not incremental recommendations about providing “pillows and blanket sets”, but something more whole, more substantial. Could they have examined restructuring the bathrooms on the trains? For decades, with the help of the Railways, we Indians have been defecating across the face of the nation. Can we change that, and perhaps monetise the solution? How about using the waste to generate fertilizers or energy? What are the pluses and minuses of that? Alternately, would a redesign of the compartments with lighter material lead to fuel savings? What could be the cost savings? What safety risks would the lighter compartment bring? Another thought: How about building better railway stations and creating a whole new, beautiful retail space in the station? Can we convert that precious space of the “railway station” which is mostly located in the central areas of the city into a “third place” to hangout — between office and home? What revenues could be derived from the retail stores that will populate the “new, cool railway station,” the “third place”?

Straitjacketing approaches

The straitjacketing approaches we teach in B-School and promote in the Indian corporate world are not going to help pose or answer such questions. Innovation requires breaking bounds not just in application, but also — and more importantly — in thought. Paradigm shifts should not be just the effect, but in fact, should be — again more importantly — the cause for innovation. Would it be heresy to teach B-School students that Porter's framework and the concept of positioning is not all that there is in strategy, that the core-competence approach despite its brilliance has limited application, that Blue Ocean for all its attractiveness does not tell you what to do when your blue water is bloodied by lean and mean sharks? Would it be heresy to teach them that all these approaches to strategy are necessary but not sufficient conditions for strategic success? Would it kill us to teach them that we need to stop thinking of organisations and businesses as mere machines to which we apply formulas and frameworks, and instead think of the next frontier in strategy where we will have to work with organisations as if they are living, breathing, humans who have stories to create, live, and tell?

Till we find our self-confidence, our own voices, and brand Indian ways of innovation that go beyond the stereotypical jugaad that seems to be our only answer to innovation, we will have to remain content with aping others and making the same mistakes that the others made — others, who incidentally are not brighter than us. Till that time, no original innovation will come out of India.

It's now time to ban the crow-ness of B-Schools and executive cadres. It's now time to also proudly bring in the colourful finches, the macaws, the mynahs, the bulbuls, and the whatever. Are we ready?

No Exams!

I owe my apologies. I have not been keeping myself updated, or maybe I just forgot the import of this news.

So it turns out that the government of Bengal has decided that there are not going to be any exams till Class 8 in government run schools. No, let me correct myself. Exams are going to be there, but it does not matter whether you pass or fail. The marks are only for your own assesment, and will be used to work on your improvement. You'll pass all the way till Class 9. Then who knows...

Whats this grand idea about?

As per education minister Bratya Basu:

"Children are gradually becoming afraid of exams. In order to free them from this trauma, we are thinking of making exams till Class 8 as optional," Basu said, talking to reporters here.

"I am not against the examination system, I just propose to make it optional. This way we can lessen the burden on children who feel the pressure. How can you effectively assess a student if he or she is traumatised," said Basu.

Emphasising on the need for students to speak English, the minister said: "I have discussed with educationists, teachers and others. They all feel that for students to do well both at the state and the national level they must know how to speak in English. So, we are thinking of introducing a 50-mark test of spoken English from Class 1."

Uh-huh. Gotcha.

This all sounds very nice and noble. Little children. Playing in the sun. Lovely carefree childhood. School is where you go to learn. No pressure. Have fun. Learn new things. Work all the way up. Then, when you are mentally ready to face it, you'll have exams. Super. Utopia descends on earth.

This would have been very nice especially for people from relatively poor areas or rural backgrounds. Many children from not well-to-do backgrounds drop out of school when they fail, and rather take up some handicraft or work to earn money. This sounds like a great option. If you are not going to fail, then might as well sit through all of it. At least as far as possible.

But wait. Didn't you make one little assumption?

You are essentially saying that children are going to study even when there are no exams and learn in full earnest. Ok. Why?

"I am not against the examination system, I just propose to make it optional."

-- oh cool, show me a kid who'll appear for an optinal exam.

"How can you effectively assess a student if he or she is traumatised?"

-- how can you asses a student without exams? Or, if you have 'optional' exams or exams 'just for the sake of assesment' why do you think that would be a true assesment when there is no specific motivation to study?

"This way we can lessen the burden on children who feel the pressure."

-- sorry for a reality update. There is pressure. Pressure to excel and perform and make a living out in the world where almost nobody is willing to give you a second chance. All the more so in a country like India with a huge population and not-so-many job opportunities. And you have just destroyed the competitive ability of children. Face it, its tough. Thats how its meant to be. Education is meant to harden your mind against the realities of the world and equip you with the skills you need to survive. Not just in terms of words and numbers, but also in terms of mental attitude.

"They all feel that for students to do well both at the state and the national level they must know how to speak in English. So, we are thinking of introducing a 50-mark test of spoken English from Class 1."

-- and this brillinat congregation of people parallely decided that it is not really important to know arithmetic in order to succeed?

The point is, the only reason (at least I feel) exams were kept from an early age was to make children study. Nothing else. You cannot explain to a kid why education is important for them. They are way too young to understand that. The only motivation they have to study is so that they can pass the exams and stick around with their friends and not feel bad about being left behind. In the process, they actually read and learn.

If there is no risk of failing a class, then why bother? Why listen to what is being taught? Why make an effort to remember anything? Why go to school at all? Wont it be much better just to sit and goof around and play?

We are therefore running the heavy risk of undermining the very need of education at an early age. By putting this false mask of re-assurance, we are crippling children all the way upto grade 8 when its too late already. Then come grade 9, no wonder scores of them will fail or drop out, because nobody remembers anything, or read anything seriously.

Yes, I am not in favor of seeing little children fail. I know how terrible it feels to your self-confidence, respect and ego when you watch all your friends go ahead of you and you are left behind so heartlessly. Its not good in any way. But surely THIS is not the solution.

What could we do then? We could invest in better education. We could get better teachers, and not let the school service commission be a farce. We could reprint books and try to present the content in a more interesting manner. We could make effort to make learning fun, enjoyable. So that at the end of the year, exams seem like a natural process rather than something to be feared and nighmared about.

But no! Who wants to do all that? It takes so much time, effort and money! Just go for a shortcut instead!

Talking of the shortcut, here's another interesting observation. Who goes to government schools anyway? Not the upper middle class or the rich. Only the poor and a part of the lower middle class for whom probably private schools are way too expensive would do that. And people in villages probably, where there are no provate schools anyway.

So what this measure just did is that it placed the lower rung of the population in a permanent disadvantage. You just made sure that the poor remain poor, essentially uneducated and in servitude. At the same time, you tickled their ego a bit, making them feel good about having gone "through school", and won some public acclaim and a good number of votes. Bravo. Maybe these people actually have more brains than sometimes I suspect.

But if we did see through it, its time to react. Enough.

Awesome Jumping Power

Sometimes I wonder how wonderful it would be to have the eye-view jump superpower. What is that? Its really cool. Say you are standing somewhere, and you cast your eyes as far as you can reasonably see. Then you say the magic words, and voila! You are there!

Simply awesome. Not to mention that you can keep repeating this, hopping across the countryside like no car possibly could. Heck, if you could land yourself on hills, you might go quite as fast as an aeroplane!

Of course one needs to worry about where you are going to land. For example, there are no guarantees to your safety if you landed right in front of a speeding car. It would wham you, and blow the living superpowers out of you. So for all practical pursposes, its probably a good idea to land somewhere you can clearly see to be safe.

Then there is the public issue. You would not like to attract attention, perhaps, to your little unusual-ness. So do it when its a bit empty, or maybe in a really thick crowd too, but where everybody is just way too busy to notice you. But then again, you have to remember the issue of landing somewhere clear and safe. You would not suddenly want to end up on somebody's shoulders, worse still somebody of the opposite sex. The consequences could be really disturbing.

Given these restrictions, its still a really cool thing to have. You would never have to worry about commuting across states for your job - it would be a matter of an hour, at best. You would not need to worry about being stranded at sea, even better, where you can see for miles and miles and in all probability is a pretty safe and clear place to land on, provided you can swim between hops. Thieves and robbers would be practically shit scared of you, when they would point a gun at you and you would simply vanish.

And best of all, when you are happy, you could do a hopping dance of a lifetime!!

Then again, sometimes I also wonder whether I am going mad...

India Against Corruption (?)

Sitting here now in USA, it is amazing to watch the nation being swayed by the India Against Corruption movement. Annaji, and his allies, have successfully caught the attention of an entire nation, and have brought people from all walks of life, in almost every part of the country, to a common sentiment.

At the outset, the effort is to be praised. The issue is genuine, this I think we all agree over minimal debate. Almost every one of us have faces the below-the-table dealings of government (and sometimes non-government) civil servants. It is common knowledge - corruption is India's second currency, and politics is essentially a slang. It is heartening to see that there are people who believe that a change is possible. More importantly, it is heartening to see that those people are not alone, that Indians from almost all cultural, religious, economic and occupational backgrounds of all ages have raised their hands in support.

While the intentions are undoubtedly noble, history is witness that even the best of intentions have a bad habit of going awry. Let us take a moment, and for once try to understand why is it that the movement has amassed such a fan following. Of course there are people who know the cause through and through, but which I mean that they have done their homework, read through the actual Government Lokpal Bill and Annaji's version and know what is what. But lets be honest here. Do all the people who are walking the streets today, voicing their vociferous support, really know what the are supporting? If we have a show of hands for who all know precisely what the bill means, how many would come clean?

I am not hinting at some underhandedness in the design of the Jan Lokpal Bill itself. While my understanding of it, like perhaps thousands of other Indians, is only rather basic, with some coverage of who all is under it purview, what can be questioned and investigated and how it differs from the Governement version in some basic ways, for the sake of argument I am willing to trust the people who were behind its fabrication, as well as the judgement of my well-informed brethren who made efforts to put up suggestions and modifications on the websites over months. I am willing to trust them because by the way it was created, it seems that they do not represent the compartmental interests of a particular section of the populace, but has come to be a ground for the agglomeration of opinions, grievances and suggestions across a wide range of people who have long suffered under the said cause.

Neither would I venture to say that Annaji and his group are taking undue advantage of the "right to protest" which itself seems to be much in question now. Arvind Kejriwal has openly discussed the point that there can be no compromise when it comes to curbing corruption, and while the our-way-or-no-way attitude may have been intransigent on another occassion, the fact that the group is not alone in this erases the suggestion that they are trying to blackmail the Government to bend their way. If people all over the nation are trying to bend the government into accepting something, I would personally label it as representation of the opinion of the masses than blackmail. No, my concern resides elsewhere.

Why are the hundreds and thousands of people who actually do not clearly understand what they are vouching for willing to fight and protest? One must realize that this is a powerful emotional moment to many of us, the "common men", the "middle class". Forever have we been taught that "India is a great nation", that we must love our country, that we must live up to the efforts of the greats who brough freedom to our nation, and so on and so forth. Forever have we seen our freedom and rights being taken away from us, in some pretext or the other. Forever have we silently grieved and grudged those who were supposed to be out first point of defense upon desperation - the Government - and only been cheated further in return. Forever have we tried, in vain, to love our contry and be proud of Her. Today, perhaps for the first time after independece, the "common man" has an opportunity. An opportunity to shout out against those who refused him justice and his true rights. An opportunity to feel important and involved in a possible change, hopefully for the better. An opportunity to hope that all that we learned and grew up believing, only to realize that it was an empty dream, can yet be realized. Add to that the shameful and frustratingly blank-headed tactics of the government in dealing with the situation, what with banning protests, imprisoning the leaders of the movement, and people who had any rational doubts about the bill are now all the more convinced about who the villain and the hero is. The power of this psychology is perhaps what is driving thousands of those people who really know nothing about the bill per se. They are waving the banners because like their grandfathers and grandmothers 64 years before them, they feel a frenzy. A frenzy that there is hope for a better tomorrow, and not necessarily becasue they understand the pros of a legislasture inside out. A frenzy that, though well intended, is often not based on sound, concrete and well-reviewed logic.

This is where the concern lies. 64 years before today, I daresay there was a day when Gandhiji aroused the whole nation on probably a much larger scale that what we are seeing today. They too braved the sticks and bullets in the hope of a better day. And when the day came, they danced, they sang, they joyously claimed victory, and went home, thinking all was done. Little did people realize that the deed was not in overturning something that was existing, but in finding a truly rewarding alternative. And so it happened. Power passed from the British to the Indian politicians. The change that people fought and died for remained in the books and papers and the constituion and lectures at the law college. Walk into a village at some remote end of the country, and honestly, they would not know if they were still under the British Raj. For the people who gave their blood, nothing much really changed.

Why did the best of intentions of millions of people go wrong? Because we the people, who attempted to implement the prized changes, were ourselves flawed. We were blinded by the power, position, money and advantage that it offered open in front of us. And so one by one, the political landmass of India slid into debauchery, resulting in a day that we have today, when we are essentially needing to raise a hue and cry for a "second freedom movement".

Do we have a guarantee today that the same is not going to be repeated? I fear and doubt despite all hopes, because the Jan Lokpal Bill today gives the same offer of unprecedented power that some musthave seen one day 64 years ago. Supposing that today we win, and the Bill goes through, most of us will return to our own lives, thinking happily that good times are ahead. In the meanwhile, will those who come to weild the new One Ring of Power not fall prey to the same debauchaery that engulfed generations before them? Are we sure we are not risking the initiation of another landslide of corruption in the years to come? And I fear the most, because the people who are today marching in parades and shouting sloans and weilding banners are the same people who turn a blind eye, day in and day out, to child marriage, female foeticide and suppression of rights of tribal minorities. They are the same people who throw garbage on the streets, besmirch sites of Natinal Heritage, ask for dowry in marriages and go on riotous rampages after Godhra. When we are ourselves so very imperfect, will the utopian expectations of "perfect" laws sit well with us? If tomorrow the same laws for which we fought bite back against us, even if for completely genuine reasons, will we bow our head and learn, or will we go on another nation-wide rampage until our egos and personal needs are satisfied and every voice of unwanted protest silenced?

If we are imperfect, the system that we shall get will be imperfect too. If we want things to really change, then alongside fighting for the BIG issues with flamboyant demonstrations, peharps we should also look into ourselves and mould ourselves from within to try and reach a greater level of perfection.

On Why We Are Going Abroad

Back after a long long lull, with a significant post very relevant to the current season.

Look around you. Its everywhere. And whether you smile or frown, appear proud before your neighbors or openly fret about your frustrations, it is an undeniable truth. We are all leaving. Some for good, others for a good long span of years. Its a cross-country egress - nobody is left out.

The trend has now become so obvious that this post runs the risk of being labelled cliche. Gone are the days when going abroad was the luxury of a chosen few. Today half the nation's youth is going abroad, and the remaining half is wishing they could follow as well. Some are going for work, others for education. Many will never return.

How do we react? We all know the drill. Over the phone, before the relatives and on the jogging track with neighbors we are proud parents. "Oh my son/daughter is going to USA you know, (s)he has got this really great offer.... and the pay, oh, its like 2 lakhs a month in Indian rupees ... blah blah." "Oh really? My cousin is going to UK to do his Masters ... great environment for education ... job opportunities after the degree are great too, even better than what they get from here, like your son/daughter." We openly gloat on it, most of us, and would not mind even to indulge in some competition amongst ourselves to prove ourselves the luckiest of the lot. A LOT.

Luckiest, did you say? In the quiet cover of our homes, our squeals of delight reduce to screams of agony. Yet another son gone to foreign shores. Yet another member of the family lost forever. Yet another step towards a lonely, helpless aged life. "I was born alone, I shall die alone" - the words never sounded more true. But what can we do, oh what can we do? They are our children, and their happiness matters. And they want this. They want it more than anything else right now. We cant hold them back, we cant ruin the 50 years of their lives for our remaining 10 or 20. We have to let go, yes. We shall hold back our tears. We shall bid them a happy good-bye, and write to them, and email them, and see their faces on Skype. Its a small world, is it so difficult?

But each time we garner courage in our hearts, the fear of loneliness, age and death eats into it like termites. We know they might not write back, mail in reply or come online on Skype. They might get just what we wanted to give them all this time - happiness. And we dread that out and out. That they can be happy without us. They can go ahead and find a life of their own, and never bother to look back. Things that were said and taught over and over again in school to be the final aim of an established person - it all seems terrible, too terrible to face with the thousands of miles of separation in between.

And then as the days pays, the pressure of frustration caves our hearts in. We crumble. We shout and fret and blame our children for forsaking us. We cry before those who are closest. We curse the government for doing "nothing about it". And while we are at it, another batch of youngsters is making their way to some other coveted land. And the cycle goes on.

The irony is that parents only think thus far. There is only sadness and frustration. If there is blame, it has to be directed at the children, or, at best,the government. Never do they, never do we think, what did we do about it?

And that is the most fundamental problem. We did nothing about it. If children today are migrating to foreign shores, it is because of us. Us as a whole. Had we done what we were supposed to do well enough, hard enough, then this day would not have dawned upon us. After all, why are all these people leaving? It is because they see no hope. No hope of good education. No hope of employment. No hope of well-deserved pay, respect in society, and a chance to live an honest and equal life. Trust me, all those youngsters going abroad, they are not after millions of dollars. They are not looking to become Hollywood stars or enterprising billionaires (although yes, some of course do end up that way). All they want, all we all want, is a simple life, a loving family, a respectful society and a satisfying and rewarding work. Such things don't change over a couple of generations. It is the means of attaining those goals that do.

And what have we done? Did we wake up at 7 AM each day and go for work? Did we love, live and preach what we do? Did we give it our best at our workplace, and work beyond the scheduled hour just for the kick of it? Did we come back home with a smile on our face and satisfaction in our heart?

Oh no we did not. We went to work late. We lazed away the day. To prevent ourselves from hearing harsh words and a possibility of being sacked, we formed unions whose sole purpose was "We wont work and you cant throw us out because of that". We bribed and asked for bribes to get work done (or undone). We actively engaged in politics. We filled our schools and colleges with people of political influence rather than merit and then sucked up to them for our own benefits. Education, learning and thinking were made our last priorities. When industries and factories closed down, we simply forsook everything that was indigenous, and bought foreign clothes, foreign Tvs and cars. We made going abroad a prestige issue to be boasted about. And at the end of all this, we were never happy. We did not come smiling back to home despite the easy life we had. We were unhappy, each moment of our lives. We wanted more. More money. More relaxation. More useless stuff to buy and fill our useless lives with. Wives, families and children were just for granted. We lived to eat, pretended to work only because it paid, and then boasted about our lives before our neighbors, and competed with them to show whose life was the most worthless.

Is it surprising, that our children, born and brought up in this atmosphere where the governing principle seems to be "I am living because my parents did not resort to abortion" will ever see any hope? Maybe other nations are no better, but at least they have not seen it first hand! They believe they can start a new life there, where people just don't survive, they live with their heads held high. They may be very wrong. But they believe in it, and they will work hard to make their belief come true. Here, we just don't believe in it any more. We believe we are doomed to survive as another voter in a country of over a billion people. We are a 'nobody', and there is no chance we can ever be anything different. We see no hope ourselves, is it unusual that our children don't?

And so they are going. And so they shall be gone. Generation after generation , age after age. Unless you wake up. Unless we start pointing that finger of blame at ourselves instead of at all other directions. Unless we start doing well what we were supposed to be doing all this time. Is it too late already? Maybe it is; but if you believe that it is not, if you believe it day in and day out, so hard and so strong, that there IS hope left, then hope might just reconsider coming back to us on its own.

The Documentary Debate

So here's another debate story. This one is between me and my friend Vatsal; we'll call him Vats for brevity's sake.

Vats is a good mathematician and physicist. However, he belongs to the group which I call as the "derivationalists", which means to say that Vats does not find any fun in science that is explained without the rigor of mathematical derivations and deep physical laws. In short, Vats is quite against popular science.

I have had this debate with Debanjan (Deb) earlier too. Deb is also a "derivationalist" and completely against pop-sci. He feels that it is a complete waste to time to read about an overview of something from a magazine or Wikipedia without starting from the basic principles of physics (we are talking about physics here), reading tens of publications and deriving everything in that field out by yourself.

As a result of these views, we often have clashes on our view of scientific documentaries that are presented in educational media like Discovery or NatGeo. We are specifically talking about documentaries in pure science rather than engineering ("Megastructures" and "Extreme Engineering") because we do agree that the presenting of enigineering design on-screen, be it a Porsche car or the Tokyo Int airport, does hold some merit, because these constructions are "nice to see", and there is really no big point in telling people how an IC engine works or how the strength of materials is calculated to bolster the beams and columns.

Vats (and I believe Deb too) has a strict no-no on pure science documentaries. Being "derivationalist", he raises objections on the way the content is organized. It is obscured in several perspectives. Supposing the documentary starts from the basic principles, then it is difficult to cover the latest philosophies in the course of a single hour. If they intend to touch the latter, they begin half-way, and the uninitiated viewer has no clue about what hit him, and he goes for the schoolboy's approach of "accepting what is on the board to be god-gifted truth". Well, it is true that certain in-depth documentaries have attempted to span the entire horizon of historical development of the subject matter - like the set of 6 documentaries on Astrophysics and Stephen Hawking's theory, which started from the days of Tycho Brahe and ended with Black Hole radiation. But in going into such a vast coverage, one risks the fundamental point of "jumping the steps", as it were.

In such documentaries it is not unusual to come across Einstein's General Theory of relativity explaining gravitation as a "cloth fabric on which the heavenly bodies are located". If you have watched these, you would know that the narrator proceeds to say that the "weight" of the Sun depresses the "fabric" - creating a funnel-like curvature, into which the planet gets pulled in, and the revolution of that planet may be shown to counter the gravitational attraction of the Sun. You might have seen a construct like this at science fairs or exhibitions too, although I doubt whether they did mention Einstein.

At any rate, this interpretation may be looked upon as a culmination of Vats' dissatisfaction with documentaries. And its not without reason. About 90% of the viewers who have been wowed at such a lucid explanation of such deep principles have not considered the most obvious flaw in this argument. The reason we think that a sphere placed on a stretched extent of cloth would depress it is becuase we are used to thinking the sphere having some "weight" which is nothing but a manifestation of the Earth's gravitational force on the sphere. So essentially you are using gravity to explain gravity.

Even if we did accept it as a "visualization aid", the curvature that mass essentially produces is a curvature in space-time, and nothing in this analogy can bring that factor in (unless you carefully describe a light synchronized clocking mechanism in each intersection point of the grid). Furthermore, and Vats tells me this for at this point it really gets beyond my knowledge, there are fundamental roadblocks to one's thought processes if one starts with the belief that gravitation is like the depressing of a fabric. He tells me there is some matrix, when when diagonalized and blah blah gives some parameters. From these parameters emerge the gravitational constant and other factors, which tell you the effect of a mass on space-time. Vats being a derivationalist, this over-simplified approach disturbs him a lot, as it misses out on key concepts and insights into the true origins and ramifications of the theory. The viewer feels that he has "got the thing" when he is as far away from it as he always was, if not more.

Vats' points are logical and true. I do not challenge his points, for being trained in science (though not to his level of detail in these matters), I can see how the links are missing in such documentaries. But my basic argument is not about the excellence of the content, but about the people who watch these documentaries.

So who watches documentaries? Students for one, both from high school and universities. With university students, the trend lies more in watching documentaries from a different area of human knowledge rather than their own. And, mostly, common people who have an interest in science. Imagine this. You were once greatly interested in physics and math. You were an ardent student of these in school. You moved on study engineering, and then in due course of fortune you ended up working to develop algorithms to calculate risk in stock market trading (think GS or MS). Now you have neither the time nor the level of training to indulge yourself in all those topics in physics that they never taught in school. From your perspective, what would such a documentary bring? A refreshing way to fulfill all those dreams, in my opinion. Sure, you cant go teach relativity in the next college lecture. Neither can you sit and derive all those wonderful laws and principles. But if nothing else, you could manage to hear and know a little about those things which you would have otherwise forsaken for good. You did not become an expert, but you had the fun of reliving your physics days, and gain a little more perspective in the process, for all of it is not hogwash.

From the point of view of students, we have to be a more careful. And this is where a good documentary stands out from the rest. For students, documentaries do serve as some of our first insights into the subject matter in many cases, and the concepts and ideas gained thereof stick with us like childhood memories. So some day if we end up actually studying those topics in detail, we would not want our mental roadblocks to get in the way - like the sphere on the cloth conundrum. Neither would we like to talk about half-learned ideas before an educated audience, if the occasion so arises.

In this way, a good documentary is like a good teacher. It sets inquisitiveness aflame. It does not claim that what it is saying is the sacrosanct facsimile of the philosophies of the topic. It tells you, "Well, this thing is actually complicated, but just for starters, you might want to imagine it like this..." It always tells you what is the flaw in its simplified view of looking at it, and warns you against taking it too literally. In doing so, one must be very ingenious and crafty in thinking of the most apt analogies, so that they capture as much of the complexity of the real scenario as possible. Where such analogies are impossible  - like the "spin" of an electron - they should be avoided for good. At the same time, a good documentary does not go into unnecessary piles of math to try and be precise. That is not the intent of the show, and in more ways than one, a documentary with truck-loads of data and number-crunching turns out to be boring, non-intuitive and scares people's interest out of the topic by telling them "This is just not your cup of tea".

As a citation, I'll point to the BBC4 documentary called "The Music of the Primes" - a show on the search of pattern in prime-numbers. This documentary caught my eye in terms of content and organization. It started from the fundamentals, introducing why prime numbers are important, why there are an infinite number of them, etc. Then they spoke of how Gauss went about trying to find a rhythm in the probability of a prime number showing up in logarithmic progression of numbers, and how it did not turn out to be perfect. Then they spoke of the Riemann zeta function, and most tactfully avoided saying anything about plotting functions on Argand planes and all, yet they said that the "valleys" (zeros) of the "contours" of this function in "that other world" (complex domain) held the key to correcting Gauss's step-approximation to precision. They spoke of the conjecture of alignment of zeros, and the difficulty people have faced in trying to prove it. Yet they did not let the show reach a dead end, and spoke about the immense importance of primes in code breaking (Alan Turing), nuclear energy levels and online commerce (encryption). The other show - on the final proof of Fermat's last theorem - did have a definite ending, but was not that well organized and had too many logical "jumps" to make me feel comfortable.

For that matter, books have suffered from the same flaws. Nobody told us that Gauss' Law was more fundamental that Coulomb's Law (some state boards left it out for good). Nobody said that the "g" is actually the gravitational field of the planet. Some even said that an electron "spins about its axis", and went on to equate the atomic structure to the solar system (its like believing Santa Claus actually spends out of his pockets to give children gifts). Just like we have to be wise in our choice of books to learn the correct and the best, so is it when it comes to documentaries. And the joy of a well-set documentary is a lifelong interest in a subject matter that may have just completely eluded us in this lifetime.

Of lost traditions

This year on the Bishnupur trip I came across a rare example of Indian heritage. So rare indeed that it is only available here of all places in India. Just as a background, let it be mentioned that Bishnupur is a little town some 200 km to the north west of Calcutta. It is located close to the town of Bankura, which is the district capital of the same name. Bishnupur used to be the capital of Bengal at the time of the Malla kings.

Bishnupur is known for temples. The temples do not house any deities. Rather, they are noted chiefly for their unique style of architecture. In general the temples are based on a rock foundation, which is followed by a four sided structure held by pillars on each side. Each of the walls a richly decorated by earthen panels that are thoroughly worked with engravings. Engravings originate from the Ramayan, Mahabharat or from the general day to day life of the people of the time. The top of the structure is a curved roof - something like a tent. One may imagine it to be a four cornered handkerchief held at four corners, and buffed by the wind. The top is usually a single peak, often not very richly decorated, but examples of design with more than one peak exist.

What is truly remarkable about these designs is their indication of cultural origins. One may note the pillars to be not the typical Bengal style of architecture. Their girth, relief and contours seem to indicate towards some other origins. The allusion becomes clearer when one considers the design of the door panels along the walls. The doors, divided into small square panels, and having rich decorations in each block, are strongly reminding of the design of doors in forts and palaces of Rajasthan. This realization does reflect back on the design of the pillars, although their correlation is far lesser to the origins.

Another immensely interesting and yet intriguing observation came to my notice here. On one particular temple (Madanmohan) we discovered a carving containing a dragon inscribed on to the wall. I have not yet understood this well enough, and have no idea about how such an object can come into a predominantly Indian architectural style. Maybe those with greater expertise may be able to explain the same. Or again maybe it is a misinterpretation of some other creature which was originally intended to be drawn. But what could be most intriguing is whether Indian myths ever covered creatures such as dragons, or whether this could actually be the impression of some Chinese traveler in those far-off days whose own culture came to influence the symbolism of our own.

But this is not really the object of this writing. This writing is intended towards that one thing which is unique to this town. The object - an artwork for that matter - is called the "Dashavatar cards". These cards are fabricated by one particular family of artists in the town - called the Foujdar family, and they are the only ones in India in fact who have this expertise. The Foujdars - as one might suspect from the name - were once employed at high ranks of the military structure of the Malla kings. On the order of the king, they devised these cards.

The cards are essentially depictions of the 10 incarnations of Vishnu. The main pack comprises a central card denoting one of the incarnations - the "King", along with another primary card, called the "minister". This a backed up by a set of floral cards - 10 in number, having progressively 1, 2, 3 etc flowers, up to 10. This makes for 12 cards per incarnation, and a total of 120 cards for all the 10 incarnations combined. There are some secondary sets, of 10 cards (incarnations alone), 48 cards, and some other varieties.

The cards themselves, are not made of paper, but of cloth. Each card comprises 6 layers of fine woven cloth, held together by specially fabricated glues made from natural sources like seeds and fruits of plants. The picture of the cards is painted onto the cloth, and the colour too is made from indigenous rocks. The rocks (like sandalwood) are soaked in water and rubbed onto a surface to produce the colour. Some other varieties of colour some from flowers and leaves. The final product is glazed in lacquer and sealed into a circular shape. The general diameter of these circles is around 10 cms, but some varieties of larger or smaller sizes are also produced.

The card game is based on the set of 120 cards. Now comes the real problem - only the Kings of the Malla dynasty knew the rules and methods of the odd game that they invented with this pack of cards. The makers did not know how to play - they only prepared the cards as per order. The kings played it with a select group of people from the town - those who were close to the kings. This group of people treated the game as more than merely a game - they considered it more of a worship of Vishnu - and thus surrounded the game with elaborate rituals. The players had to sit in special seats, could not smoke or drink while the game was in progress, and neither could they leave from their seats without taking a bath to come back. To preserve the sanctity of the game, they refused to pitch it out before the common public.

Recently - somewhere in the '80s, the last of the Malla kings passed away. After that only the people from the families of the other players were left with the knowledge. The makers, now desperate to preserve this culture, as well to hold their business, tried very hard to learn the game. But they only managed to learn the basics, following a lot of persuasion, and this really did not get them anywhere far. The elderly players outplayed them easily, and refused to divulge the deeper secrets of the strategy of the game.

It so happened that one copy of this set of cards somehow made its way to a museum in Germany, and a woman there was intrigued by its possible origin and uses in course of her research. She came over to India after she maned to make contact with the makers of the cards, and tried to speak to the elderly players. Naturally they were reluctant to put out the ideas, especially to a foreigner, but finally she persuaded them to come and play in front of her for a regular payment of a large sum of money to each of the players. After 3 months of the labour, she managed to understand how the game was framed and she took back the knowledge to popularize this odd version of cards in Germany. This in turn spread out the game in France and USA, and the makers now mostly export the cards since very few people have the money to buy the cards in India. The price of the total set ranges from 6 to 12 thousand rupees, the cost mainly arising from ingredients like the colour and the gum which is very expensive to prepare, along with the great amount of labour that goes into its finalization.

What is really shocking and surprising is that almost nobody in India is ever aware that something like this exists. Someday we might go to Germany and be very surprised to find a new version of the card game, and marvel at their expertise and ingenuity. But we may never know that this wonder actually originated so close to our own homes. Not just all over India - people all over Bengal hardly know about this in general. For all its worth, its a tradition, a heritage, which is well on its way to being forgotten in the pages of history, and will only be glorified in the west through some other name. The poor card-makers, for all their skill and expertise, will one day fade away into hunger and poverty.

The marks of this nonchalant attitude are rampant all over the place. Many of the heritage sites are not well maintained. Timings of opening and closing are seldom properly observed. The temples are plagued by officious guides and irritating beggars. Overall, at least from a foreigner's point of view, the site does not produce an impression which it should for the worth of its content. I am not sure if we can do something about it directly, but I guess indirectly we certainly can, and we should, at the earliest.