Sunday, May 20, 2018

JNU: SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND ATTENDANCE ROW

JNU: SEXUAL HARASSMENT AND ATTENDANCE ROW
R. N. MISRA
JNU flashed into the limelight again, this time for more wrong reasons and even without Kanhaiya’s ‘Azadi’ gimmicks.  The cause was more academically inclined with sexual harassment of a girl student pursuing research.  Later, it turned out to be a terrible movement against such harassment of more than eight students.  However, their combined FIR was not accepted.  Those girl students ultimately submitted separate FIRs almost containing the same language and the same offence, thus creating a doubtful case in the eyes of law.  It was an explosion of immoral activities of a professor cum research guide who had been torturing his female students for quite some time.  Academically, JNU seems to have rolled down to the lowest level because if students are not sexually safe, how can the institution survive?  With whatever modernised ways in sexual freedom the institute has acquired, it has still a limitation as far as the teacher and a taught relationship is concerned.  A teacher must have an unimpeachable character.  If he is unable to maintain it, he must find some other job.  Whatever is the politics involved in such cases or even deep-rooted group power is played, a teacher in every respect come out blotless in his individual sexual and moral character.  It must be noted that when a girl complaints about sexual harassment her whole life is at stake.  Her future is supposed to be marred.  Therefore, she rarely complains unless the matter becomes acute and unstoppable or goes out of control. 
The post-Nirbhaya scenario has created a different situation and provided a platform for judging     men-women relationship distinctively.  It has left no choice for an investigating authority if a complaint is lodged by a woman against a man.  It has to frame a charge-sheet.  The man involved in the case is arrested immediately.  He may be bailed out, but the damage is done instantly.  Therefore, the men should give a deep thought to their action or go even hundred times to think before taking any untoward sexual act, physical or non-physical.  He must know that no evidence is required except girl’s own statement and no collaboration is needed to confirm it. In this respect, the man is highly susceptible to be charged with a criminal offence.  The Verma Commission has redefined the concept of rape and our IPC has been changed accordingly.  The rape includes all five points which Justice Verma has mentioned. They are:
1.      Physical contact and advances or
2.      A demand or request for sexual favour
3.      Making of sexually coloured remarks or
4.      Showing pornography and
5.      Any other unwelcome physical, verbal, nonverbal remarks and conduct of sexual nature            
Justice J. S. Verma has dealt with in detail the concept of rape, sexual assault and harassment.  Rape is not limited to penetration of private space of a woman as was accepted earlier.  It includes oral and anus sex also.  Any non-consensual penetration of sexual nature is included in the definition of rape.  In this respect non-penetration form of sexual assault is also rape.  The acts of sexual assault means use of criminal force or disrobe a woman as an attempt to insult woman’s modesty.  All such acts come under definition of rape.  Rape also includes use of foul words, gestures, unwelcome threat of sexual nature, stalking, staring and molesting etc.
The above acts of offence have been elaborated to explain what constitutes rape in Indian conditions.  These points should be known to every man who comes in contact with a woman in his personal and professional life.  Men should be alert, behave and act properly if they often come in touch with women.  A teacher is supposed to be a friend, philosopher and guide to all his students and he must rise above sexual considerations.  To his girl students, he must appear to be a father figure.  This is the minimum social qualification of a teacher which we expect or else who will send his daughter to an educational institution?
JNU is no exception for the moral codes as adopted by its teachers.  It has a very high sounding anti-harassment committee known as Gender Sensitization Committee Against Sexual Harassment (GSCASH). But it functions differently to what it stands for.  Within 24 hours the offender must be suspended and inquiry committee must finalise its decision within 3 days.  If the offence seems to be true it should be reported to police for further inquiry and FIR be submitted on behalf of the victim.  This is what JNU should do in sexual harassment cases.  So far JNU has shown laxity on such matters.  It was this reason that a sexual harassment complaint developed into a movement.  JNU once again failed in its duty and has demonstrated a very low level of its administrative competence.
Now I come to the matter of attendance which became a dominant authoritarian contention at JNU.  It must be kept in mind that attendance as a form of activity is a necessary evil.  It has different shapes, effects and styles through which a person’s presence is registered.  It is applied differently in different cases.  The concept of ‘presence’ is variously styled.  The attendance which is needed in an educational institution differs from the attendance which is held in other centres.  The attendance which is taken of the criminals in a prison cannot be compared with the attendance as is taken regarding the university students.  Even among them, a research scholar has a different form of attendance than PG or undergraduate students.  Though the concept of attendance is the same, its form varies from institution to institution or group to group.  It varies from proxy attendance to the highly liberated form where columns of presence and absence are filled arbitrarily,  thus the formality of completing the register is done. It is in this light that JNU attendance should be taken into consideration.  Every fool who has a little schooling understands the concept of attendance as it is generally prescribed i.e., 75% classes to be attended.  When JNU VC declared 75% attendance mandatory for all students, irrespective of their classes, gradations and levels, he posed administratively a nave and funny problem.  JNU already has a statuary provision for the same.  What was the reason which prompted VC to reiterate the same?  Naturally, under his nose, the concept of attendance was not seriously taken; rather it was unofficially permitted to avoid attending classes by students.  The teachers do not regularly maintain the register of attendance and only under pressure and emerging situations they fill the columns as needed.  The situations have always been the same or tell us how many students were detained in the previous session from appearing at the final examination due to shortage of prescribed attendance?  The teachers know well how they maintain the register.  Why and how suddenly this attendance ghost started haunting students?     
            
 In actuality, the mandatory 75% attendance came to light as retaliation against the sexual harassment cases filed by the girl students.  There ought to be no connection between sexual harassment and attendance.  But some of the professors created it as a defence against their immoral activities.  These are two separate concepts.  Even a student who does attend classes less than mandatory percentage has every right to complaint against the professor for sexual harassment and shortage of attendance cannot be made as an excuse.  By mixing abruptly sexual harassment case with mandatory attendance the VC and some of the professors have confused the matter so as to punish the complainants.  It is a clear case of mismanaging an educational institute which once had a good reputation.  I wish that the attendance matter must be dropped or diluted in good faith so as to create conducive academic atmosphere.  As for sexual harassment cases are concerned let them take a natural legal course.  JNU sexual harassment cases have been followed by a movement first by a combined FIR and later on through individual FIRs which have made the whole situation farcical.  JNU students are experts in creating a ‘movement’ but they are unable to fight their individual cause.  JNU in this respect represents a confused group of some of its teachers and students and the present sexual harassment case, as has been clubbed with a mandatory attendance, is a real example of this confused scenario, retaliation, and defeatism on the part of its administration.

 Delhi High Court has admonished JNU for not providing a safe environment for women students.  The report of the fact-finding committee set up by JNU was an eyewash.  It contained nothing substantial to know about what happened in the Lab No 409.  Even both the parties were not called to give an explanation.  What type of fact-finding committee it was?  If it had no power why it was set up?  VC is the weakest link in the whole affair.  JNU must understand that there ought to be a permanent committee to deal with sexual harassment cases and setting up a temporary committee like the fact-finding committee is a violation of the law.  Every institution employing or dealing with men and women must have a permanent set up to deal with sexual abuses. By mentioning committees after committees (GSCASH/FCC/ICC) and doing nothing or trying to buy time to protect its staff is a clear indication that JNU has never taken seriously the matter of sexual offenses.  Hon’ble High Court/ Supreme Court is requested to set up SIT to look after the matter and bring JNU to book so that in future no such laxity in dealing with sexual matters be done by it.  As long as a safe environment for women students is not provided, and VC does not submit an affidavit to the court (HC or SC) to this effect, girl students have every right not to attend classes, labs or research activities. JNU must be taught a strong lesson for its open violation of women rights.  













             

Friday, March 16, 2018

ON WATCHING PADMAAVAT

ON WATCHING PADMAAVAT
R. N. Misra
If you wish to see 3D cinematographic effect at its near perfection from Indian standard, the film Padmaavat would be a treat to your eyes.  If further, you desire to observe minutely the midriff in several scenes of royal and not so royal ladies, Hindus and Muslims alike, the very first dance in Turkish-Afghan style as celebration for the acceptance of Nikah within the close family, in presence of Feroz Jalaluddin, would certainly throb your heart and keep you anxiously waiting for Bollywood Padmavati to appear as a dream girl dancing as courtesan like perfection to the tune of her director.
       
This      makes a turning point in your mind about the film.  Was this really the face that launched Jauhar?  Was this Mewar or Rajput icon danced with Thumkas and waving waist?  How had the natives of Rajasthan regarded her their mother or in a broader perspective as Goddess?  For those who are unconcerned with the history of Chittor and never thought of Rajasthan of Medieval India, the cardboard structure and make-believe landscape of sand dunes and Aravali hills, falsifying history and geography together, the film Padmaavati provides sufficient return with satisfaction for the money in dollars or rupees spent per ticket for viewing it.  But then from where comes the drama so melodramatically staged by Shri Rajput Karni Sena, one wonders?  For an average man this is just another Bollywood film with suspense, fight, sex, murder, and the villainy – all as part of entertainment – and the comment like ‘see the film as a film’ is quite justified.

But the difference comes only when you try to be mindful of your pride, your icon, the essence of your cultural and historical account as a part of your critical judgement or emotional aspect of your collective consciousness in a Bollywood dramatized version of the film on Rani Padmavati – the spirited queen of Chittor.  Rani Padmavati/Padmini had no occasion, purpose, craft, need and reason to dance like a dancing girl.  But the heroine of the film is paid for it; paid for her midriff to keep open; paid for dancing with choreographic perfection and Bollywood harbours such sensuous exhibitionism.  Dances and songs are synonymous to this tinsel city of India and if there is no demand for these in the film, they invent them.  Bollywood has invented ‘item song’ superficially and there is Shabana Azami’s lone voice which has opposed this ‘Play-Girl’ culture only recently.  If Bhansali’s earlier films are of any evidence, he is the perpetrator of this trend and this time Padmavati became the victim of his insensitivity by choreographic depiction of an iconic personality – the queen of Mewar – whom people of Rajasthan worship as Goddess.  Bhansali made Bajirao dance in his earlier film and objections were raised by the Marathas, but the matter was subsided.   Bhansali kills the very spirit of plot and the story by creating choreographic effects and movements of his heroes and heroines.  In Devadas, Paro was made dance in a mismatched sequence.  Devadas is not a historical figure or Paro is not an iconic character, but there is some established literary truth about them which should not be falsified.  Even Ala-ud-din Khilji has danced in Padmaavat.  It is awkward rather shameful to look at Padmavati dancing.  The question is from where had she received the training?  She was asked during her marriage reception at Chittor to present a Ghoomar dance of Rajasthani origin whereas she was a Singhalese damsel with no expertise of a Ghoomar dance.  It was an impossible proposition.  It was, on the other hand, unbecoming of a Rajput Rani to have danced like that.  An important personality of Rajput clan, who upholds the legacy of Rani Padmini/Padmavati, Maharaj Kunwar Vishwaraj Singh son of Mahendra Singh of Mewar has reportedly called the film “a historic fraud to portray an incorrectly attired courtesan-like painted doll in the song as the very ‘queen’ the film purports to pay obeisance to”.  

Here one can draw a parallel case of abuse relating to the iconic figure of Gandhi.  It concludes: “Artistic freedom cannot be used for abusing icon like Mahatma Gandhi” SC.  It adds, “You cannot use abusive words or diminish historical figures (by putting them in an unacceptable situation) under the garb of artistic freedom.  There is complete freedom of ideas but freedom of speech and expression is not absolute.  The Constitution provides restrictions and it is a regulated freedom” (TNN/April 17, 2015).  Article 19(1) of Constitution guaranteeing freedom of speech, but it restricts under certain conditions in Article 19 (2).  In case of Mahatma Gandhi episode (Supreme Court), it has been observed, “Had it been an ordinary Gandhi, it would have not been a problem but abusing icon Gandhi is objectionable”.  It further explains, “You can write a satire on Gandhi, lampoon him or criticise him, but if put abusive words in his mouth, then it is not permissible”.  Here the same yardstick should be used for Bhansali. The case is one Bhansali vs collective consciousness of the Hindus of India in general and people of Rajasthan in particular.  Rani Padmini is an iconised figure of India as dignified, honourable and graceful as Gandhi, Vivekanand and Rani of Jhansi.  Why Bhansali had been allowed to make a mockery of an icon? Why Rani Padmini was gracelessly reduced to an item girl?  In some of the scenes in the film, Ala-ud-din Khilji holds a lotus flower in his hand and kisses it too.  It is a symbol of Rani Padmini (Padma pushp symbolises her) and Khilji openly plays with it.  It is like embracing the queen, an act more offensive than a dream sequence.  This has tortured the inner self of the people who uphold the legacy of Rani Padmini and feel disgusted and deceived at the hands of Bhansali.

Now going back to Nehru-era, the fifties and sixties of the last century - there was an earnest demand - for making a film on Gandhi.  Nehru liked the idea but had reservations about Bollywood’s capabilities in making the film on the iconic personality of Gandhi.  Nehru knew the fact that no Indian cinematographer would be able to do justice in that case.  The matter was dropped rather prolonged for another generation to come.  By that time Attenborough was trying his skill to handle this great project on Gandhi and wrote the film script.  During the last years of Nehru, the script was shown to him but the matter was not finalised, though tentatively approved.  It was again prolonged with so many drafts, corrections, cuts and perusals of the script.  During Indira Gandhi’s regime, the matter was actually finalised and it took more than 20 years (1959 to 1982) to come to the film in shape.  Making a film on the icon like Gandhi whom the whole nation revered as a father figure was not an ordinary task.  But Attenborough succeeded in depicting gracefully the dignified life of Gandhi.  The film on ‘Gandhi’ grabbed eight Oscars and India basked in reflected glory.  Is it possible even a fringe like this for Padmaavat to achieve?  Hardly will it earn a national award (and awards like Filmfare are just a personal sharing – less said the better).
What is the difference between the film ‘Gandhi’ and ‘Padmaavat’?  Both are period dramas in contents and based on the life and deeds of two great iconic personalities of India.  But judging from their production stand-stand point, the film ‘Gandhi’ succeeded in historic contents and maintained reality of the main character supposed to be projected without much artistic liberty.  Padmaavat in this sense failed in bringing about the real historical character of the queen Padmini who never hit her paramour with a bow or was loved instantly in that fashion and danced a Ghoomar – the art form – which was not so developed then.  Actually, it was not a real Ghoomar dance at all.  Bhansali has produced a Bollywood-Mix where other Rajasthani folk dances had been put together creating a cocktail of local dances. Attenborough, on the other hand, maintained the dignity and honour of the lead character as his life was unfolded step by step.  There were no songs, no dances; not even Gandhi’s popular Bhajans and yet the film stood at the top of the world.  Bollywood filmmakers must learn the cinematographic art from such films.  What did Bhansali do of Padmaavat?  The spirited queen was disgraced, degenerated and was made to dance as a courtesan with costumes not befitting the queen of Mewar.  Padmavati has been turned into a commercial commodity while Gandhi of Attenborough remained, simple and dignified – a true icon - father of the nation.  People who opposed Padmaavat were displaying the inner feelings – the collective consciousness - of their community and the society.  They were not a fringe group, but a majority of the people.  But those who interpret the laws are not as sensitive as those who are the lawmakers.  Hence the majority suffers; an icon gets destroyed.

The film has a funny start.  Ala-ud-din was asked to bring a feather of an ostrich but he brought the whole live Ostrich. A photographically managed image of a zoo-fed ostrich convinces the audience and the viewers of the film that something big and special has been brought to impress upon the princess – Mehrunian – to win over her heart.  One can imagin to eat a royal roasted turkey – a large bird specially reared for that purpose – but to accept an ostrich as a part of menu for Arabs, Afghans and Turks and their descendants inside Delhi Sultanate is highly unimaginable.  Muslims are voracious meat eaters but not as obnoxious and ferocious as shown in the scene where Ala-ud-din Khilji gulps up the pieces four times bigger than his hands.

You will have a few refined scenes and moments to enjoy the film that may elevate your thought and sublimate the inner self.  The ambience created around some scenes is profoundly managed and dialogues, diction and delivery are beautifully arranged and performed.  These may earn some credits from those who oppose the film on some other lines.  These specific moments have saved Padmaavat from getting doomed and show a silver line in maintaining some honour and dignity of the queen. 

But what did historian say about it?  Some of them were vocal and others neutral.  Farishta and James Tod had accepted Padmini’s existence, though they differed with each other about the dates and happenings.  When you open a historical account after a gap of two/three centuries, such inaccuracies are bound to crop up.  But the modern historians specializing in the medieval history of Rajasthan have conclusively accepted Rani Padmini, Jauhar, the siege of Chittor and its ultimate fall on Monday 26 August 1303 CE.  But some of our historians differ.  Prof. Irfan Habib never gave any cognizance to Padmini.  And those who have nothing to do with history or art of film criticism have given certification to the film to convince the people that ‘when it is a work of fiction, why you worry for Padmini? The film's name has been changed to Padmaavat (of Jayasi) and it is not history.  But by the same argument that it is being a fiction, Bhansali should not have included in the story the scenes of Chittorfort, names like Ratan Singh or Padmavati.  The film should have been named like Leelaavati or Kalaavati etc., but it should not have any proximity to historical characters and places as was done by Bhansali.  This is a fraudulent way of expression and it should have been restricted and curbed.  The basic problem is that no constitutional authority has given any deep thought over it.  Our Cinematographic Act is weak and its interpretation makes it much weaker to protect our national or community icons from getting debased or suffer indignation.




Sunday, December 3, 2017

PADMAVATI ROW: A RENAISSANCE IN MAKING

PADMAVATI ROW: A RENAISSANCE IN MAKING                                                     
R. N. Misra
Defeated people don’t write their history (or not capable of writing) at least during the period of subjugation.  The victors normally steal the show and manipulate history the way they like.  If they are a bit true, they mention a few facts of the vanquished but avoid many others just to please the rulers.  This is the normal course of history.  For decades or centuries, the defeated communities or nations don’t find a reasonable place or occasion to vent their voices, sensibilities and acts of heroism shown in defending their honour and dignity.  And if some sporadic attempts are made to narrate them, nobody takes them at face value or cares to understand what they are writing about. During the course of a long gap of centuries, the history of the vanquished is forgotten or defused to the extent that even the existence of the fact is questioned.  The unwritten history then assumes the shape of folklore, oral stories and ballads because that is what the defeated people can do. This has what exactly happened to the historical image of Padmini/Padmavati - the queen of Mewar.
The theory of history has some limitations.  It needs to justify the fact, event or happening through evidence, written material or archaeological surveys and findings.  And if these are not available, the historians ignore it or at the end, term it as fictitious.  But why the half-truth is included and finds a historical interpretation?  Historians who fail to mention elaborate and truthful accounts create doubt in their own integrity. If they do not mention any such account or narration owing to the fear of rulers, it does not mean that the event did not happen.  Amir Khusrau, during Khalji Sultanate, was the royal historian with a purpose.  Alongside his poetic genius, he had an insight and a sharp imaginative mind.  In his writings of history compiled as Khaza’in-ul-Futuh, he had not gone beyond what Alauddin Khalji wanted him to write and he never displeased the ruler.  Khusrau lacked the deep acumen and neutrality of a ‘war correspondent’, though he had accompanied Khalji and his deputies in several expeditions in north and south of India.  When the highest form of sacrifice – Jauhar – took place in Chittor, why did Khusrau fail to mention the names of the leading ladies who had organised it?  Jauhar was not an ordinary happening and those who had organised it were the queens having developed larger than-life-image in the minds of the people and known to everybody by their names.   Even the charred or unburnt bodies and royal ornaments would have revealed some strong stories.  But Amir Khusrau, who had accompanied Khalji in the battlefield, avoided going into the details, as he did in many other battles, cutting short facts, happenings and events that took place during his time, including the details of the Mongols’ attacks from the north-west of India.  This makes Khusrau a controversial reporter, rather half historian and half poet.  Unfortunately, contemporary historians like Ziauddin Barani and Isami also ignored to give any reference to Padmani.  However, 16th Century historians Firista and Haji-ud-Dabir were among the earlier writers who mentioned Padmini as a historical figure but their accounts differ with each other and with that of  their contemporary, the poet Jayasi (1540 CE).  All the later historians taking the clue from folklores and ballads accepted Padmini/Padmavati as a historical figure but by the time they followed history, it had already taken the shape of a legend.
The time-gap in history is a dangerous precedence.  The writing of history is a continuous process as every time or age has something real and factual to tell which provides the solid evidence to form history.  Unfortunately, nothing was done in case of Padmavati and her sacrificing life for two odd centuries to come after the battle of Chittor (1303 CE).  We were left to believe folklore, local stories and bardic material to form the image of the great queen Padmavati who sacrificed her life to save the honour of womanhood as supposed by the Hindu women in general and the Rajput women in particular during that time.  One wonders how the gap of more than two centuries was created by not mentioning the existence of Padmavati.  It may be a hidden policy matter or a historical conspiracy nurtured during the rules of Muslim invaders from khalji Sultanate to Sher Shah Suri reign (1290-1545 CE) or beyond.  The legend attached to the name of Padmavati may be sorted out by the people of that community to establish a realistic image of the queen taking the sensitivity of the matter into account.  When history gets mixed with the fiction, we have to work out on the basis of the collective consciousness of the people.  History has to be written or reshaped and gaps have to be filled if facts were distorted and defused at the time of actual events.
Malik Mohammad Jayasi (1540), like Amir Khusrau, was a poet but more imaginative and fanciful in his approach to writings.  History provided him just a plot or the story and he took all sorts of poetic liberty, almost bringing Padmini into a form of the fictional epic poem known as ‘Padmavat’, and the queen of Chittor could never get out of that fantasy even after several centuries that lapsed after her death.  Jayasi created the mess of history in his own way or perhaps the way his past and present rulers would have liked it.  He was a frequent visitor to Rajasthan and collected bardic material to serve his purpose.  His flight of imagination made his character of Padmini unrealistic.  It was neither Rajasthani in spirit nor queen-like in majesty.  Padmini was reduced to a phantom of delight for those who loved poetry of a sensuous nature.  She was the material of a love-story but depicted in a different form, more accurately a lust-story to be enjoyed by the commoners written in their own language.  This lustful imagery of the poet became so popular among the Mughals that at least 20 odd renderings of the text of Jayasi’s Padmavat found its place in Persian and Urdu languages.  It was much later and perhaps with some changes in original usage of words and construction, that Ramchandra Shukla, a great Hindi critic, writer and historian, found it and established it as the masterpiece – Mahakavya – or a great epic poem of Hindi/Awadhi language in later half of the 20th Century and Padmavat got a respectable place in the literary world of India. In the epic, Jayasi described types of women the same way as Vatsayan depicted them in Kamasutra and Jayasi’s physical observation and presentation of women is no less artistic and fanciful than that of the sculptures of Khajuraho.  Jayasi’s imagination enjoys poetic liberty as a closed set of vectors, but is no less objectionable than Leela Bhansali’s open visual material.  Jayasi has imagined lustful scenes in Padmavat, exhibiting Padmini’s boob like well-shaped oranges and nipples over them like the proverbial worm (Bhanwar/Madhukar) sucking the Juice.  Jayasi is supposed to have unlocked the master bed-room imagery quietly in the mid-night like an uncensored scene of a Bollywood movie.  What type of Padmini was being imagined by Jayasi? Was that the face of Padmini that launched Jauhar along with thousands of her female companions?  Nothing worst and lustful imagination, as it was, could be depicted of a honourable Chittor queen whom the whole of Rajasthan revered like a goddess.  Leela Bhansali, on the other hand, imagined Padmavati as a dancing lady who turned and twisted her waving waist on the tune of the director.  Padmavati never danced like this and imagining her dancing girl was even more derogatory than what Jayasi made her a dream girl.
James Tod (1829-32) has his own narration of the history of Chittor.  Unlike Amir Khusrau, who accepted the line of the Muslim invader – Alauddin Khalji, Tod tried to reshape the history and renamed the rulers of Chittor during the first decade of 14th Century.  But one thing seemed to have evolved as a common thread that Rani Padmini existed and the battle between the armies of Alauddin Khalji and king of Chittor was fought owing to the legendary beauty – Padmavati.  James Tod, an imperialist historian, believed that he could make or unmake history of Rajasthan in his ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan’.  Neither the Muslim invaders nor the British imperialists gave the true account of history during the period of Rani Padmavati.  However, Tod was much realistic as far the sources of history were concerned and he had made the use of manuscripts, inscriptions, persons, and the material which he could get from the local bardic legends, songs and folklore.  A conclusion can emphatically be drawn that Padmavati existed and she was not a fictitious character as many of the pro-British and pro-Muslim historians of our time believed including Prof. Irfan Habib.  Historical references are now available that the army of Khalji had marched to attack the Chittor Fort on Monday, 28 January 1303 CE and after strategically surrounding the fort a fierce fighting took place which intermittently lasted for eight months and  on Monday, 26 August 1303 CE Chittor surrendered in an open final war. Just the same time all the females inside the fort along with the queen Padmini, who organised them in a group, launched the final battle to die - Jauhar - so that they might not be caught by the Muslim invaders and could save their honour and dignity.  
We can base the story of Padmavati primarily on the above analytical facts by accepting her existence as a queen of Chittor and showing her valour and determination to sacrifice her life for protecting the honour of Rajput women in the final attempt to embrace Jauhar.  Such an elevated soul must be shown in a dignified way by those who write a report of events, compose an epic (poem) and produce or direct a feature film. Padmavati’s persona stands for heroism, piety and sacredness.  She is no less than a goddess to a Rajput and the people of Rajasthan would never compromise with her dignity if it is ignored, disgraced and debased.  Amir Khusrau, Jayasi and Bhansali are on the same line of distorting, defusing and deforming history in the name of a historian, a poet and a film maker respectively.   
The row over Padmavati is not a simple affair.  It has developed into a movement.  It is a process of renaissance to establish true historical values in the society, art and culture of which Bhansali may also be a part of a creative filmmaker. He must rise above commercial considerations and subdue exhibitionism through the choreographic presentation in the film which he is fond of.  Other sensuous scenes hurting the sentiments may be avoided.  He must stoop to conquer the hearts of the people.  Audacity in art does not pay.  Art for art sake is meant for museums and archives to store.  What the society needs is the art of a living phenomenon which generates vitality and force to enrich itself vis-à-vis the society.  It is for Bhansali to choose.  It is easy for a director to make Deepika dance but tremendously difficult and historically out of tune to make Padmavati dance.  Jauhar and dance don’t go together.  Our revered Sita, Savitri and Draupadi have never been shown dancing in the films.  These characters don’t demand such a story and so is the case with Padmavati.  Bhansali’s Padmavati is full of fantacy and fraught with severe ills. It hurts the collective sensitivity of the community, society and nation.  We are shaping a renaissance where old values have to give space for the new to establish.  It requires greater understanding and new interpretation of history.  We have had enough of Jodha-Akbars; enough of degradation of our Gods; enough of distortion of history.  Artistic creativity does not mean to make fun of our accepted values.  There is a limit to such liberty.
The other day an eminent and experienced judge had opined that freedom of expression is a ‘negative’ right.  It can be interpreted in different ways.  We can use our freedom of expression by establishing the truth which may hurt somebody.   But our constitution does not allow hurting anybody.  This is a negative right.  Ravan had this negative right of expression against Ram and this led to conflict.  So the right of expression is not absolute.  One cannot hurt the collective sensibilities of the people, be it a small or bigger group.  Our fundamental rights are bounded by a reasonable limit.  The Padmavati row is a fight between the collective sensitivity vs individual liberty of expression.  But you cannot establish truth without hurting somebody.  Padmavati row is an expression of collective consciousness of the people.  It is a precursor of a renaissance being brought about in India today.  It is a long drawn battle to be fought nationally and internationally to establish truth and create new awakening among the people to protect honour and self-respect.







Friday, August 26, 2016

WHAT AILS JNU?

```````What Ails JNU?


It is JNU at its worst.  When an educational institution starts getting deteriorated in an accelerating way, the end result is the product what is called – Kanhaiya.

Jawaharlal Nehru University started with good intentions to commemorate the memory of our first Prime Minister who valued the higher education and research as the very basis of national foundation for growth and development.  This university was the brain child of Professor Nurul Hasan – a renowned historian, elder statesman and an academician with abiding faith in leftism.  He developed personal proximity to Pandit Nehru and Mrs. Indira Gandhi during heyday of these leaders.  Both the leaders projected democratic values with ideologically inclined left to the centre attitude. They visualised socialist pattern of society with mixed economy and mixed polity as the bases for their future course of action.  These ideologies are now the relics of time and do not work anymore.   

JNU, according to Professor Nurul Hasan, was established only as a research centre of high order, more than what we have, the Institute of Advanced Studies, at Shimla.  So the university was set up particularly to cater higher research in humanities with no provision to have post graduate classes and professional courses to degrade its research standards and programmes.  JNU started with higher aim of research centre in 1969. A few professors were appointed to start with.  But from the very beginning, it could not justify its existence purely as a research body fully occupied with research activities.  Professors at the university demanded opening of PG classes because they feared they could lose their jobs for not being engaged fully in research oriented activities.  This was the first stage of deterioration of JNU.  

When JNU was started it was wrongly supposed that it should harbour communist ideological base since its originator was inclined to leftist ideology.  But this attitude dominated, somehow, in the recruitment of professors unofficially.  At an early stage most of the professors were imported from West Bengal.  Good or bad, the university started getting coloured ideologically, day by day, year after year, so as to develop a centre for communist propaganda.  Although educational institutes should be, in principle, neutral towards politics, but JNU, nonetheless, became a hub of communist’s activities – in theory and practice both.  This was the second stage of deterioration of JNU.

Our national governments at the centre have always been soft on ideological basis as part of democratic freedom.  Mostly it was the Congress government which ruled over sixty years, mildly and softly, and allowed the university to become a political centre and a breeding ground of communists of all variants and varieties. It was nothing wrong till it crossed limits and became a separatist centre for encouraging Kashmiris separatists and terrorists.  Even Vajpayee and Modi governments did not interfere in JNU affairs till February 9, 2016.  For the last two-three decades, JNU activities were getting more and more politicised, actively and passively, through its teachers, students and even vice-chancellors.  It was a wrong practice to put up VCs at JNU with leftist leanings.  This was a hidden practice, but prevailed invariably for the appointments of the top posts. But why did this happen?  Because it was felt that everybody should get his organisational head according to his choice.  Professor Nurul Hasan was made the Governor of West Bengal only because he was supposed to be leftist in ideology and was easily acceptable to the State during that time.  So many VCs were appointed at JNU who had leftist leanings.  This created an accumulated impact of bad governance which ruined the university.  Most of JNU professors who survived this ordeal were supposed to be leftists, actively or passively.

             JNU thus became consciously a cauldron of communism.  There were various variants of communism which flourished on the campus.   The Communist Party of India (CPI) was the most wide spread of all.  It was revolutionary party which cultivated communist aspirations grown on Indian soil.  Another party on campus sowed its seeds a bit differently through its powerful organ i.e. CPM (Marxist).  It developed among students deriving its strength purely on Marxist ideology.   It was ideologically a hard core party which propounded Marxist theory of work and action and derived inspiration from erstwhile Soviet Union.  But the worst of all was the shade of communism which spread its ideology through revolutionary spirit as adopted by Maoists.  It is CPM (ML & Maoist) which supports Naxalism, Red Book, Lal Salaam, the Gun through which the power flows, and suppression of the Nation and Society till the power comes to the hands of the poor.  They work secretively and combine with separatists and terrorists.  The present upheaval at JNU is the result of this group at large.

Here one must relate to the changes brought about in the communist world.  With the fall of Berlin Wall and USSR broken into pieces, the relevance of communism in the present day world is only historical.  It has no place in the globalised economy and democratic free world.  JNU is sitting on the relics of old ideology of communism.

It is strange rather surprising to know how separatist activities flourished on JNU campus and no precautionary step was taken up to curb them by the administration.  It is good to provide freedom of speech and also to allow students to celebrate their cultural programme, but how outsiders with covered faces entered the campus?  In fact, they were well invited persons, not intruders, and known to JNU students community.  Kanhaiya, the VC, Proctorial Board and the Disciplinary Committee of JNU are answerable to the citizen of India as they are paid out of their tax money.  What they were doing when anti-national slogans were raised?  Why the proctorial board or any representative member of the board was not present on the occasion.  It is the duty of proctorial board to keep account of student’s activities on the campus in detail.  JNU administration has miserably failed in performing its duty in this respect.

The other fact which is normally ignored, and often misunderstood, is the role of police on the campus. The police, as legally appointed investigating agency, have every authority to enter the campus if the crime is committed inside the university.  It is a myth that it can’t go inside the campus – a notion that is non-sense.  If the police force does not enter the campus, it is on account of its own good gesture. In some especial case, it can wait till the accused does not surrender.  But normally the police can arrest the person who commits criminal offence inside the campus.  However, the accused has every right to call his/her lawyer to defend the case before the police and the court and seek time for the same before arrest.  In the present case of JNU, the government vis-a-vis the executive council of the university are equally responsible for not taking precautionary measures to stop student’s menace repeatedly occurring on the campus.

JNU students are divided in various groups and factions.  These groups are basically political in nature but they operate as cultural bodies which go at times out of control and create law and order problem.  The role of police becomes imminent here and no permission of the Vice-Chancellor is needed to control such a situation.  No place is out of bounds for the police.  Is there any clause in the statutes of JNU or any other university in India where it is written that the police cannot enter the campus?  When students go on rampage, the police force helps the authorities to bring the situation under control.  The students on the campus act heterogeneously because of their different groups, variants and mind-sets.  The students have their own organisational bodies such as – SFI, AISA, DSU, NUSI, AISF, LPF, DSF, BAPSA, CFI, ABVP etc.  As long as they work separately or work within their own group, no problem arises.  But the moment a large gathering of various groups is held in the name of a common cultural programme, the problem crops up. They do not recognise each other either by face or by name.  And in the event of such slogans as raised by students on campus on 9th February, 2016, a pandemonium was created; a chaos was generated.  It is tragedy to note that the JNU controlling body remained somnolent to the whole affair on the campus.  Of all the variants of student’s bodies at JNU, it is the total sum of ‘Communist Group’ which dominates the campus.  This group is all powerful and remains at variance with the other bodies.  Since this group has all India and even foreign support, the group is powerful monetarily, organisationally and ideologically.

Under the unprecedented situation of chaos and confusion, not only the students, but some teachers remain involved actively or passively.  They support the right of freedom of speech even at the cost of anti-national slogans; they issue press notes in favour of students even when they behave unruly, creating utter confusion and total chaos.  They politicise the issue to gain students favour.  But such activities directly hamper their growth and inversely impact their teaching and research standards. They let loose students do whatever they like except learning, library and class work, tutorials, seminars and regular research papers to be prepared and submitted to the faculty or the guide.  At JNU students get more time for political activities than attending classes and teachers spend more time in supporting political activities than delivering lectures in the class or guiding research work.  Some teachers become so familiar with students that they live at their level and even visit their home town to create regional affiliations.  Caste, creed and sectarianism dominate their relationship and education becomes worst sufferer in this scenario.

It is pertinent here to understand how the red forces fully occupied the campus.  There are different shades of red found at JNU.  It is a war within – between different shades of red.   When the students’ union elections are over, they almost become one.  It is this fact which makes Kanhaiya more convenient to attend the function organised by any other sub-group of which he remains an intrinsic part.  When anti-national slogans were raised at the function, Kanhaiya was very much the part of the gathering, not that he was passively standing, but he was actively involved.  He has not attained sainthood to become passive at a place where he has to show his mettle well.  He was the part of larger connivance being organised on the campus.

The early years of JNU did not witness any political impact.  First two-three years were well engaged in pursuing Ph.D. and M.Phil. courses, guiding students and managing their research projects.  The School of International Studies was established and the first set of students was mostly research oriented.  The general tenor of the school was apolitical.  In case of Russian studies, the students and teachers were pro Soviet Union but there was no politics attached to it.  These were the formative years of JNU when it posed to be a serious centre for learning devoid of any political leanings.  The professors at this centre could in no way be identified as Marxists, communists or socialist.

But the scenario did not last long. Mr. Prakash  Karat, who had returned from UK and got acquainted with the ideological functioning of the British Marxists, became instrumental in giving a broader structural frame work to the already existing neutral students body at the School of International Studies (SIS) at JNU. Karat got into close contact with CPI (M) leaders who wanted their students’ wing, SFI, opened at JNU as it was believed to be a clean slate for the party for its entry into JNU without much competition or fight with other bodies.  With the initiative of Karat, the SIS students’ association got merged with SFI and a new JNUSU constitution was properly framed to give an institutional structure to the students-union.  This was how ‘the left’ and JNUSU came to be known as one and the same thing, at least, during the initial years of development of union activities at JNU in which Karat played a leading role.  Thus ‘Communism’ and students’ ‘Unionism’ were born at the same time at JNU and CPI (M) had an advantage of being the first organization established on the campus.  In 1971, an independent candidate won Presidentship, but in 1972, SFI candidate captured the seat.  This followed the ‘Communists Activism’ on the campus.

However, the functioning of the new School of Social Sciences changed the character of JNU.  It was CPI which started inroads on the campus.  Thanks to the group of students and teachers led by Professor Moonis Raza and patronised by the stalwarts like professor Nurul Hasan and others for giving clear way to the establishment of the student wing of CPI,  AISF,  on the campus.  CPI had mass base at the All-India level, while CPI (M) was effectively located at provinces, especially West Bengal and Kerala.  The split of the party was not good for the left movement, but the leadership never tried to bring out any reconciliation or compromise for it because of the power they held in their own constituencies and provinces.  In JNU, those responsible for setting up AISF were active party members who belonged to the groups of students and teachers.  However, both the communist parties attempted to bring these two wings of students together to converge and to be called Progressive Democratic Front (PDF).  Initially it worked out as proposed, but could not achieve much success in the long run.  When the School of Social Sciences (SSS) started MA classes, the main research work for which the university was established got pushed to the background and the real decay of JNU started.  PG and under graduate students were least engaged in learning process and they enjoyed spending more time on political discourses and related activities.  Since this time, political activism became a fashion at JNU, and learning, research, class room work, lectures and seminars were reduced to pass-time professions and students and teachers were least bothered about them.  It may be said that with Professor Moonis Raza JNU attained its perfection and with him started its decay.

The radical left wing students were least satisfied with the theoretical as well as the practical aspects of the programmes as spread out by the parties, from time to time, which they felt were less effective.  They wanted sharp, militant activities, more revolutionary and practical for quick change and transformation of the society.  It was at this juncture that students’ wing known as AISA was born of the parental body called the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Liberation.  This party believed in the ideology of the revolutionary legacy of Bhagat Singh and Chandrashekhar Azad.  They also got linked with the “AZADI” movement of NE and Kashmir.  There prevailed an utter confusion among leftist and radical revolutionary groups of students on the campus.  Majority of the students were communists belonging to CPI or CPI (M), but they also accepted the ideology of militant groups and adopted their slogans of “AZADI” of all varieties.  They wanted “AZADI” from and within India.    They made a very thin line between these two types of “AZADIS”.  It was only when Kanhaiya stepped out of Tihar Jail that he made it clear what type of Azadi he wanted.  It was an afterthought and he made a U-Turn from what he spoke actually at the gathering on 9th March, 2016 at JNU. 

Kanhaiya suddenly gets a special status in the minds of the people.  He becomes a precious news item to occupy front page, and at times, the prestigious head line of the Dailies.  In TV shows, he often gets prime time.  His rating sours high like a celebrity and his name and the events in which he participates get viral on social media.  He floats his life like available drift wood to be used by anyone who gets it.  He is never stable and clear in his thought process.  He is 30 and still a student; may attain 40, and even then a student! Who knows?  He is pursuing Ph.D. without seriously getting into it.   He wants to be a teacher, but behaves like a politician.  JNU provides him subsidised training of leadership and he has acquired it with distinction.  But his upbringing has not provided him good language, taste and temperament.  His Hindi (the only language which he speaks) is extremely bad and pronunciation is awfully disgusting.  Last year, in June (2015), he misbehaved with a girl student on the campus, but the matter was hushed up with minor punishment (fine), (See TOI March 11, 2016, Page 17, Bengaluru Edition).  He feels that he has the potential of becoming a CM or a PM candidate.  But he has no contents, appeal or force in his speeches which usually turn into farce.  His body language speaks more than what he speaks.  He presents the spectre of a juggler, forcing mob to believe the unbelievable, by playing tricks, producing rustic humour and mannerism.  He bends his spinal cord convexly, bringing his eyes up toward the sky to create fake hypnosis presuming that he has won the world  by his ‘Azadi’ slogans and wishing to get round of  applause from his less awakened peers.

It was pre-planned to create revolutionary uproar on the campus, with fully charged atmosphere, by celebrating Afzal Guru Day.  Students at the campus along with some JNUSU activists arranged a cultural evening, with belated disapproval by the university, to protest against Afzal Guru’s hanging, calling it as a judicial killing, defying the university authorities and showing contempt for the court.  Students raised slogans against India and showed solidarity with anti-national forces by demeaning the country.  The separatists’ activities on the campus were at the zenith and the celebration was not just an evening event, but a consolidated effort, of months and years of preparations, to bring about such anti-national activities to happen.  Why JNU authorities were not alert to check and control such shameful events organised on the campus?  Such activities happened last year also but no body took any notice of them.  What had happened in JNU on that evening was unfortunate.  The slogans raised were derogatory for the nation, judiciary and the patriotic tenor of the people.  The police arrived on the campus and Kanhaiya Kumar was the first to be arrested.  The police charge sheeted him for sedition case.  A few other names were also surfaced, but Kanhaiya was on top of the list.

JNU authorities blinked the next day.  Till then much damage had been done.  As damage control exercise, they appointed a committee to inquire about the whole incident and take action according to prescribed rules and regulations.  JNU panel indicted nearly 21 students for wilful defiance in holding and joining Afzal Guru meet and at least five of them were recommended for rustication.  It is yet to be seen if it is a paper tiger or really meant for a strict action to be implemented or a way of creating a rift among students by punishing the weak and sparing and protecting the strong. 

Kanhaiya got a name, fame and got a life, love and leadership. He was flying on cloud nine.  He became famous overnight, nationally and internationally.  He found himself as a hot selling material instantly and emerged as a brand name.  Anything ‘Kanhaiya’ is a derivative of leadership, ‘Azadi’, defiance of authority, and a force generating instant revolution – Lal Salam – as he describes it.  Kanhaiya is a brand that enhances TRP for electronic media channels and an item song that is hot for print media to cover columns.  Kaihaiya is a name and a voice of freedom, opposition, solidarity and undaunted heroism.

But this popularity has been brought about for wrong reasons.  Kanhaiya has been charged for sedition by the police and it will take years for him to come out of this ordeal.  JNU is responsible for catapulting him to such heights vis-à-vis bringing him down to earth.  He oscillates between these two extremes.  What is in store for him in future only God knows, but the real culprit is the university which provides a camouflaged cage for innocent students to be trapped and get ruined.  They are not 21, but hundreds of them who receive nothing from JNU – no learning, no education, and no future.

It is for a reference to remember and go through it deep to ponder over the contents of the following passage written by an alumnus of JNU, graduated years before, but still the pinch he feels and perhaps opines for new generation to be alerted from the institute which once was his Alma Mater.  Here is what SHEKAR writes:

“I am a graduate of JNU from the 1980s, and have hated my affiliation with that institution since that time, bitterly regretting a decision not to forego a JNU degree for one from a more prestigious institution where I had the option of studying. This is not a scholastic institution in the classical sense of the term, but a gateway for subsidized entry into politics and the government. Every one of my classmates went into one or the other, the latter by a large margin, with the student union leaders ending up in the former. I learnt very little here and am glad the ideologies never appealed to me. This is one institution that needs to be shut down...we will never see great academic scholarship from here”.


JNU has out lived its utility as an academic institution in the strict sense of the term.
    



                                                                                    

Sunday, August 21, 2016

THE TROUBLE ON TWITTER

The Trouble on Twitter
Shobha Dey’s concern for Rio medals

R N Misra

Shobha Dey has shown her concern for losing a good number of Rio medals, but we are not returning empty handed even.  Her prophesy has failed to justify what she has tweeted and she has been rebuked, abused, rather made a fool of her own doings, disproportionately.  We should not be so much reactionary against her.  Criticism itself is a game and should be accepted sportingly.  Shobha has a right to say as a citizen and as a woman of sporting attributes, especially when nation’s prestige is involved, and we have been more or less heading to draw a blank.  Thanks to our sports persons, we have at least won a Bronze and Silver at fag end of the Olympics at Rio.  Shobha as a writer has excelled in her field and has acquired recognition vis-à-vis a status.  One can demean her even for this score, it is another matter; it is one’s choice to do so.  There are others who have also felt like her, but they are silent.  They neither tweet nor fill columns.  When Shobha tweets, she really means that something seriously be done for Indian sports to improve the quality, though her language remains sarcastic, impregnable  with insults and degradation. Journalism has spoiled her literary charm and she has been reduced to a columnist of a lower quality ‘Gupshup’.  We win the battles of sports but when it comes to show our might at the war of sports, we are shaken and ultimately lose it.  With a heavy heart, but most relentlessly she tweets:

“Goal of team India at the Olympics: Rio jao, selfies lo.  Khali haat wapas aao.  What a waste of money and opportunity”.

Shobha is a champion of social causes.  She has achieved laurels in the fields she has worked.  She is an excellent woman, a powerful mother, a prolific producer of children and a sporting wife always stands to win, and had there been sex Olympiad organised under the leadership of her mentor, Khushwant Singh, she would have earned Gold much earlier in life than Abhinav Bindra.

Now that the controversy has been raised and most twitterati have expressed their anguish against her – the top most exposition – that equals her sarcasm on twitter has been posted by someone equally gifted and brilliant.  He tweets in anger as a rejoinder to Ms. Shobha:

“Porno books likho.  Twitter par bakwas pelo.  Faltu oxygen ko carbon dioxide me badalo.  What a waste of space and human life”

It is paying in the same coin: in the same diction, style and effect.  Shobha has never been sensitive, sympathetic or emotional to human feelings.  She is double faced woman; keeps something in mind and expresses something else.  She thinks she has won the world by writing fu**ing novels and has become celebrity because she has liberty to write trash in her ‘politically incorrect’ columns through the courtesy of TOI.  She is female edition of her mentor, much debased and degenerated in language, sensitivity and approach.  Has she ever tried to find out causes of failure at Olympics?  Has she ever written in her columns about that sincerely and with honesty?  It is of course a separate topic for debate and discussion.  Why nations fail in general and India in particular in acquiring a reasonable number of medals?  What is that number?  Can Shobha Dey tell about the magic number? She must have contemplated about the same.  Here is what Abhinav Bindra presents his analytics. He sheds light on why India isn't winning medals at Rio Olympics and makes absolute sense.


A fortnight ago the talk in India was about how many medals will the country win at the Rio Olympics. Now, the talk is why has India not been able to earn a single medal even after sending the top 118 athletes in various disciplines.


The answer to this question could lie in this tweet from India's only individual gold medallist at the Olympics - Abhinav Bindra.  He tweets:

“Someone who knows the dynamics of Indian sports and what it means to rise through the ranks, through the hostile bureaucratic walls of the federation.
The cost of one Olympic medal for the UK is 5.5 million Pounds - that is roughly Rs 48 crore per medal. So if India wanted 10 medals at Rio Games, it should ideally have invested at least Rs 480 crore on those medal winners”

The question Bindra indirectly wants us to ask all the authorities who run Olympic sports in India is do they invest that much of money on our athletes for the country to expect these many medals.
Bindra adds:

“Perhaps, India should take the example of Great Britain and learn from them how increased sports budget for Olympics have resulted in more medals.
Since the Beijing Games in 2008, Great Britain increased its funding to Olympic sports by a whopping 16 per cent. As a result, they've risen in the Olympic ranks from 34th spot at the Atlanta Games in 1996 to third spot at London Games in 2012 to already second place in Rio Games.

It was earlier reported that US spends Rs 22 per day per athlete, Jamaica 19 paise per day per athlete and India just 3 paisa per athlete per day.
Naysayers will argue that it isn't fair to compare India with Britain's prowess as a sporting nation but what is evident is that if you have a target of medals to win at the Olympics, and can earmark a budget to achieve to that, it can work. It did so for Team Great Britain, it can for India too, provided the federations work towards that goal in sync with the athletes”.

It should be enough for Shobha Dey to realise under what difficult situation do our sports persons struggle to fight for medals and would bring back on track her sense of judgement regarding our participants in Olympics.


Most of India is composed of poor population.  Those who are rich make sports their hobby, if at all they desire, otherwise they do not enter this arena.  So sports, games and other such physical competitions are left to middle and upper middle classes to opt and excel at these activities.  By nature and circumstances, the middle class finds solace in pursuing career first which provides them earning their daily bread.  This is also the case for upper middle class who prefers education to carve out their career.  When there is choice between education and sports, they choose education which shapes their future life.  It is an individual choice - logical and pressing – and they do not opt for sports.  Needless to say that Tendulkar pursued formal education only up to VIII standard.  Many celebrities of tinsel town – Bollywood – formally remain less educated but carve out their career in dance, drama, music and acting or advertising.  So the sport is the most risky business to pursue.  And those who really make a point to become a wrestler, weight lifter, and shooter or opt for any other game of Olympic order do only on their own risk and on their personal worth. 

It is here that the society, the nation or the people at large or their institutions need to  help, encourage, organise and take care of sports persons.  Abhinav Bindra’s gold was an exception.  He or his father spent a lot of personal money on that sport and it was his constant endeavour to pursue to win.  Society or nation did little for Abhinav’s gold.  He kept the zeal and participated in other Olympics but failed.  Why? Because he pursued the life of sports all alone and nation came as a name attached to him.

The other important fact is that we belong to tropics and tropical zones are not very conducive for excellence in sports at the world level.  Our society owes a lot to young performers, sports persons and those who participate in Olympics, undergoing odds and unfavourable conditions at home. Abhinav Bindra is our pride.  But there are hundreds of future Bindras waiting for our waiving hands for encouragement and support.  Let the government and the institutions meant for promoting social and national causes come forward and help our sports persons.  Let a proper infrastructure be set up so that they may get constant support.  If a person tops the district or state level, his life should be made financially secured.  His only aim should be to achieve laurels at higher or highest level.  If a Member of Parliament or state legislature can get pension for life at the age below thirty, why not a sports person should be allowed that facility at the age of 25 or above.

One must also consider that our low performance is linked with geographical and genetic factors – both interdependent – affecting the level of achievement.  India belongs to tropical zone, almost living within tropics, experiencing unfavourable sports-climate along with the vagaries of nature – air, water and Sun.  It reduces our stamina, strength and resilience to undergo the hardships of sports activities and prove our power to achieve higher ranks at the world events or Olympics.  Still we manage to earn some credits, points, ranks or medals but not much to be proud of.  We lose several medals by a fraction of second on technical grounds of timing and counts.  We do not apply and practice the accuracy of nano seconds in our regular sessions at home due to lack of efficient tools and equipment. To understand the point of habitat and genetic factors, one must go through the latest tally of medals (as on 14-8-2016) won by the participants belonging to different geographical zones.

At Rio Olympics as on 14th August:  US: 60, China: 41, GB: 30, Germany:16, Japan:24, Russia:23, Australia:22, Itally:18, S. Korea:13, Hungry:11, Canada;11.  But none of them belongs to the Tropics

Now come to Tropical zone, the medals earned are not more than four/five by individual country.  They are:  Thailand: 4, Ethiopia: 3, Jamica:2, Singapore: 1, Indonesia: 2. Kenya: 2, Malysia:1, Philipines:1, UAE:1

What do the above comparative figures signify?  At any rate, given the present circumstances, we should only expect between 5 to 10 at best, and 1 to 2 or none at worst. And best may happen when we change our arena of sports by creating new settlements in some temperate climatic areas carved within India in middle or high Himalayas or places like Bangalore, Mysore or better hilly tracks of Nilgiris as during Raj the British army had their different commands’ head offices stationed at better places.  And this is not enough.  India must also develop human genetic engineering to produce sports persons.  This is quixotic idea, but has to be accepted in the broader sense of the term if we really want to excel in this field.  India has the best of human stock, only we have to manage it and penetrate scientifically, overcoming social, economic and political constraints.  We can raise an army of athletes if we so desire.  We must organise summer camps of sports and games in Europe or any other temperate zone for the benefit of our sports persons under the guidance of foreign coaches to learn the best of expertise, tactics and technicalities of the games and utilise the winter season for practice at home.  If we start a type of sports revolution in the country and tell the participants that money will not be a constraint in pursuing their mission, we shall in all earnestness achieve our goal. 

Not that we have done nothing in this area; we have excelled in Hockey.  It is an open air game suiting our climatic conditions, land and temperament.  We have earned laurels and produced the wizard of hockey – Dhyanchand and other dominating players to keep us at the top.  But see what has happened now?  The present hockey is altogether a different game.  It is actually no hockey at all.  Who had suggested the International hockey authorities to change the grounds by covering them with plastic grass?  Certainly we did not. We were best on old natural turf.  Why it was done so?  The change has been done to defeat Asian hockey.

The other point is that country’s population has nothing to do with the ratio of sports persons.  We should not project such relationship.  What is important is the way we organise them for sports.  We lack genuine sports culture and it has to be developed.  We do not have proper set up at grassroots level.  A cluster of villages or Taluka should have a sports-complex.  At District level there should be multiple of such complexes – each specialising in different sports discipline. This infrastructure will become heavier at higher or State level.  Sports and games should be organised under proper guidance and volunteers should be recruited for the purpose.  Schools up to 10+2 level must have instructors – both male and female.

Money is important or may be directly proportionate to medals, but without proper management, framework and structure, it may not bring fruitful results.  Statistics provided relating to this may vary and can prove anything, but our analytics may fail in the long run.  Out  of the money spent on sports, only 10 to 20 percent reaches the genuine person, the rest is spent on organisational set up lavishly.  So a watch dog superstructure should also be there to look after the sports affairs.  Reports have been received regarding the shabby treatment given to our sports persons on the one hand, and luxurious living and spending on the organizers or higher ups on the other.  Not naming anybody, it is evident that our top administration has failed at Rio Olympics to project a clean and honest image of a real promoter, helper and saviour of sports and games in India.   



The Olympics are not the true test of equals.  They try to bring an approximate equality, but it can never be done so.  This fact of matter must be understood and remembered by those who clamour for gold.  It requires equality in economy, geographical conditions and genetics which are not easily possible to be achieved.  The real philosophy of Olympics lies in participation, in global celebration of sports and game.  It is a friendly event of get together of sports persons who rejoice in participation – medals do come with their perseverance, total devotion and dashing quality to win just as bye-products.  But medal or raging war for it is not the soul of Olympics.  It is in this sense that Shobha Dey should judge our athletes. 

Now here is a final word for Didi.  Her twitter remarks have stirred up a real hornet’s nest and she has to bear the consequences.  What you share inside your sitting room with friends should not appear on twitter in a casual manner.  But Didi has done this mistake.   Still, nothing has gone wrong.  Shobha is a great lady and should apologize for her remarks.  She will become even greater.  She wields a good pen and can well subside the controversy through the power and charm of her language, style and beauty.  The athletes are the part of our extended family i.e. India and shobha will not lose opportunity to win their hearts.

Pen is always mightier than the barrels of bones.