Meaning lies in the minds of the readers

We were discussing how socialisation can be done through education in the class and our professor shared this account with us. It seems a lesson was introduced in some class text book in Kerala. The lesson went something like this. A child is taken to school by his parents for an interview. The principal asks the child his name. Then asks for the father's name, which happens to be a muslim name. Then for the mother's name, which happens to be a hindu name. Then he asks what religion should he put in the form for the child and the parents reply, no religion. The lesson ends here.

When someone like me reads this lesson, I think wow! that's liberal. Isn't it nice that children are provided the impetus to think, to create broad minds. But it seems that is not what the people in Kerala thought. The religious, especially the catholic community was in uproar. They saw this lesson as the Left's attempt at promoting atheism through education. Finally, owing to much opposition this lesson had to be removed from the curriculum. To none of us in the class it occurred that there might be any hidden agenda behind incorporating this lesson in the curriculum until, the Prof. mentioned the uproar it caused. She added that it could be a case of broad mindedness on the part of the curriculum developers in Kerala or it could be that the politicians better understand the power of education to socialise children to certain ideas or philosophies than the educators do.

That brought me to religion and the concepts surrounding it. Once I was chatting with a friend and we were discussing an a particular article which had to do with some religion. Since I don't bother with any religious identity, my friend asked me if I was an atheist. I said I am not. Why does one have to accept a religion to be a believer? Why can't one reject religion and still be a believer? But I guess it is important for most to subscribe to some form of 'ism'. To develop individual identity is to tread on dangerous grounds. It is safe to be part of a group, in this case believer or non-believer. For majority there seems to be no scope for a middle ground.

Old Chaddi Saying

Kathy is smarter than all the Chaddi's put together.

From one of my Favourite Authors

Humans think they are smarter than dolphins because we build cars and buildings and start wars etc., and all that dolphins do is swim in the water, eat fish and play around. Dolphins believe that they are smarter for exactly the same reasons.

-Douglas Adams, writer, dramatist, and musician

Supply follows Demand

The other day Manju Bhabhi and I were discussing her numerous names (she is a prophet in disguise as mental inside). She remarked with a mild indignation (level one on a scale of 1 to 10) that one of her other frequently used name came from a soft porn star in USK. I asked, how come people who make porn are not respectable, but people who watch it are? The world is filled with such illogical moralities.

A poem I read today, brought forth these thoughts. The poem touches upon the age-old gender equation. The man-woman game though not my expertise, I found the poem raises some appropriate questions.


You Men

by Sor Juana Inés de la Cruz (1651 - 1695 / San Miguel
Nepantla / Mexico)


Silly, you men-so very adept
at wrongly faulting womankind,
not seeing you're alone to blame
for faults you plant in woman's mind.

After you've won by urgent plea
the right to tarnish her good name,
you still expect her to behave--
you, that coaxed her into shame.

You batter her resistance down
and then, all righteousness, proclaim
that feminine frivolity,
not your persistence, is to blame.

When it comes to bravely posturing,
your witlessness must take the prize:
you're the child that makes a bogeyman,
and then recoils in fear and cries.

Presumptuous beyond belief,
you'd have the woman you pursue
be Thais when you're courting her,
Lucretia once she falls to you.

For plain default of common sense,
could any action be so queer
as oneself to cloud the mirror,
then complain that it's not clear?

Whether you're favored or disdained,
nothing can leave you satisfied.
You whimper if you're turned away,
you sneer if you've been gratified.

With you, no woman can hope to score;
whichever way, she's bound to lose;
spurning you, she's ungrateful--
succumbing, you call her lewd.

Your folly is always the same:
you apply a single rule
to the one you accuse of looseness
and the one you brand as cruel.

What happy mean could there be
for the woman who catches your eye,
if, unresponsive, she offends,
yet whose complaisance you decry?

Still, whether it's torment or anger--
and both ways you've yourselves to blame--
God bless the woman who won't have you,
no matter how loud you complain.

It's your persistent entreaties
that change her from timid to bold.
Having made her thereby naughty,
you would have her good as gold.

So where does the greater guilt lie
for a passion that should not be:
with the man who pleads out of baseness
or the woman debased by his plea?

Or which is more to be blamed--
though both will have cause for chagrin:
the woman who sins for money
or the man who pays money to sin?

So why are you men all so stunned
at the thought you're all guilty alike?
Either like them for what you've made them
or make of them what you can like.

If you'd give up pursuing them,
you'd discover, without a doubt,
you've a stronger case to make
against those who seek you out.

I well know what powerful arms
you wield in pressing for evil:
your arrogance is allied
with the world, the flesh, and the devil!

Vote for Flying Machine

The news channels are at it again. The day it rains a bit, they are out covering the water logged areas from morning to evening and reporting how it is not sensible to venture out of the house. Last Saturday Rascal happened to travel by bus from Colaba to Mulund and saw few TV channels stationed at Parel to give live report of the flooding. According to Rascal's aankhon dekha haal, there was no water on his side, traffic was moving smoothly, there was some water on the other side and he thinks the traffic jam must have been created by the vans stationed by them channels. I said, at least there was real rain water, over time they might bring their own tankers in the stealth of the night to flood some localities and create some news.

Now Parel and its step sister lower Parel are so low-lying, that if each resident of those chawl buildings lining the road decide to throw half a bucket of water on the road at the same time, they are sure to flood the road even in summer. As for warning the Mumbaikars, does anybody pay heed to the news. To let in a secret, we wait for the opportunity to walk home from Churchgate to Virar or VT to Thane or any place in between every monsoon. We need our yearly dose of adrenaline to take us through the drudgery of the rest of the year. This year we even have the Bandra-Worli sea-link to walk on: toll-free. The news channels are out to spoil it for us. If I had the power I would allow only 2 news channels and ration the news hour to only two hours per day, i.e, 4 half an hour slots. For entertainment we can all go back to watching Tom & Jerry.