In Conversation: India and Pakistan

Often, the most meaningful things are said in the simplest manner. One must, therefore, appreciate this effort to get Indians and Pakistanis to talk. The premise is basic – we have phones, they have phones, so telephone. I warmed to it immediately.

But, will this bring people on both sides (we are not even speaking about the two nations) closer together? This was a ‘controlled’ atmosphere, and even if comments were not censored it was understood that the conversation was to be light. What we see is one reality – the coffee shop or corner store one. The young even on campuses are politically aware and most certainly come with a bagful of stereotypes about the other. It does not negate the awareness about Bollywood, cricket, or food. Yet, all of these can be politicised on the day there is a clash of films, a match or a culinary competition.

Take that delightful moment when the Indian girl asks her ‘friend’ in Pakistan, “Do you like Salman Khan?” and the latter replies, “No. Why?”, the Indian says, “Then we can talk!” It is humorous, but in the subtlety is embedded conditionality. Or, the fact that the Pakistani is portrayed as thinking he holds on to a deep, dark secret for being a fan of Sharukh Khan.

The makers have also matched the profiles of the people they partnered, dude with dude, accent with accent; in a way it helps to bring out the commonalities but it also conveys that communication is limited to ‘people like us’.

It was cute when the Indian girl speaking to a Pakistani who wants to visit Jaipur tells her, “Main bol deti hoon inse (I’ll tell them to do something)”. Or, when the Pakistani young man asks the Indian when he will visit Pakistan and he says, “Sir, aap mereko visa bhejo tau main nikal jaoon abhi kal ka kal (if you send me a visa I am ready to leave rightaway).”

This is all tongue-in-cheek swagger, which makes it an astonishing little outing. In fact, after having written these couple of paras, I am feeling guilty for nitpicking. This is what charm offensives do!

Love it…just don’t take it as the whole truth:

A Fasting Muslim and the Shiv Sena

Who would have imagined that the humble chapati would take centre stage in politics? It is on national television in the form of grainy images of a beefy-looking man forcing another man to eat it. They are no ordinary men. One is a Shiv Sena leader, the other is a fasting Muslim. Being Muslim is tough enough; a fasting Muslim seems to be even more of a dangling identity.

However, I'd like to ask whether it is only the Shiv Sena that is using/abusing or capitalising on this identity. To get to the story first:

A group of around 11 Shiv Sena MPs, apparently angry over not being served Maharashtrian food, allegedly forced a Muslim catering superviser who was fasting for Ramzan to eat a chapati at the new Maharashtra Sadan in Delhi last week. Within hours, IRCTC, the Indian Railways subsidiary that was catering for the Sadan, stopped all operations in protest, and complained in writing to the Maharashtra Resident Commissioner, saying the employee, Arshad Zubair S, had been “deeply pained and hurt… as religious sentiments are attached”.

Would this have become news had it not been a Muslim at the receiving end? Unlikely. And the tone would have been vastly different. What we see now is bluster from all sides, and Mr. Arshad who might have certainly felt violated in some way will have to go along with the "hurt sentiment" politics because he is only a pawn. In his complaint, he said:

“All the guests along with media reporters and staffs of Maharashtra Sadan got into kitchen where I was getting the orders prepared. They caught me and put the chapati into my mouth. I was wearing a formal uniform set as prescribed by IRCTC and everybody in the panel also knew my name as ‘Arshad’ as I was wearing the name tag. Even then they inserted chapati in my mouth which caused my fast to break on the eve of Ramzan. I was hurt with the thing they have done as religious sentiments are concerned.”

The hurt should be over such physical abuse, of forcing anybody to eat anything. The Shiv Sena is communal. It is obvious that those MPs deliberately made him eat, although they knew he was fasting. They had problems with other facilities like electricity, so would they give shocks to the person in charge? Why did the media keep quiet if they were present then? This is being projected as protest against catering vs. religion now.

The incident occurred a week before it was reported. Did it take the authorities seven days to figure out what happened and what hurt was involved? Worse, we are ignoring the issue of damaging of property, parochialism and arrogance of power that the episode is also about, even if there is no story in these.

The MPs were throwing dish covers and threatening the staff. What kind of behaviour is this? Why was there no police complaint immediately, which gave leeway to the officials to cling on to the moral dimension of a fasting man?

The MPs want a Maharashtrian caterer, citing other state bhavans as an example. Arvind Sawant said:

“The food at the Sadan is terrible...They even gave stale water. We wanted to sort these issues out amicably, and did not come with the intention of committing violence. But even on that day, the Resident Commissioner refused to meet us, and after a lot of delay, said that he had gone to receive the Chief Secretary at the airport. Is that not an insult? No tod phod happened at all, but we have been provoked in a sustained manner. Nobody was manhandled, but if you keep abusing, will someone not slap?"

I am quite flummoxed about "stale water". But it is important to note that while denying that any unruliness took place, he is justifying it. The mob wrote "Jai Maharashtra" on the walls of the Regional Commissioner's office besides the behaviour mentioned earlier.

The Shiv Sena often talks with its hands. However, this incident could also be about its political equation with the BJP for the coming assembly elections. Using one chapati, they have raised their 'concerns' before the ruling party:

• The North vs. Marathi maanus
• Violence as legitimate means
• Role of regionalism
• Muslims as religion flashers

All these happen to be the BJP's favourite subjects, too. Therefore, who will benefit the most from emphasising the religious aspect? Or, should we ask, who is bailing out whom?

© Farzana Versey

Singapore Sting

Remember the time every Indian politician promised that India would be like Singapore? Remember how its former Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew was idolised for the very things that Indians cannot do – be disciplined? Remember the shoppers glowingly talk about walking down Orchard Street, which had a better ring to it than London’s Oxford Street, teeming with its migrants?

Migrants. Yes. There is not much noise about the report that Indians are finding it increasingly difficult to rent houses in that country.

If you are an Indian in Singapore and looking for a house on rent, it is highly likely that you won't get one. Most Singaporean landlords don't rent their house to Indians and people from mainland China. According to local media reports, many landlords are open about it. The moment they realize that the tenant is an Indian, they say sorry and slam the door. According to a report by the BBC, a quick glance at online rental listings shows many that include the words 'no Indians, no PRCs (People's Republic of China)', sometimes followed by the word "sorry".

Such discrimination is not legally permissible. As this report says, Singapore is only about migrants. So, choosing to segregate one or two groups is racist in the extreme and shows how certain nationalities are seen as better or superior.

Among the reasons cited are smelly curries and lack of hygiene. Were one to accept these as flaws if viewed from another cultural perspective, then all ethnic groups can have similar problems. Besides, these are properties to be rented, not shared. The landlord can always add a clause that after the lease period the property should be returned in the condition it was rented out in.


I have visited several parts of Singapore and there are different smells and sights, some of which I found revolting. The residents might feel the same. ‘Little India’ is not a ghetto, but a hub of activity. And there is a growing clientele for smelly curries. I did not see much hygiene in other areas, too.

Except for the main boulevards, and their antiseptic streets and obedient flowerbeds, there are patches of a grim controlled environment, with drab beige buildings where the majority of the middle-class lives. The markets are piled with natural cures in the form of walking and flying little creatures. At dinner one night at the famed Harbour Front, a congregation of restaurants from different regions, all I recall was a woman throwing up, her indulgence a murky pool on the pavement.

I know this has nothing to do with segregation; I just wanted to recount what memories can do. Should I judge a person’s nationality by a natural occurrence such as vomiting?

As almost everyone is a migrant there is no pressure to be nationalistic in the narrow sense. I read that Indians are identified as a race, too. The product of cultural synergy would be properly referred to with a hybrid term, e.g. the child of an Indian and a Chinese would be a Chindian.

Does this complicate issues for renting out houses? Would a Chindian be turned away twice, because of the Indian and the Chinese connection, both ‘not allowed’? And would a Eurasian be more acceptable, because the ‘euro’ factor would take away the curry smell?

There are indeed some Indians who have done well for themselves, and many are second and third generation. Their legacy includes contributing to the country. But, then, can any society survive without its labour and its white collar workers? They may not live in homes where the spluttering seeds in oil reach out, but each day they keep the wheels lubricated for things to function. Denying them space merely for their origin does not reveal a modern attitude that Singapore prides itself in.

This is a silent sort of discrimination, its impact no less damning than the violent ones in other countries.

© Farzana Versey

There's a Frenchman in the Pakistani Soup

Fine dining, by definition, is exclusive. Can a foreigner bar Pakistanis from his restaurant in Pakistan, their country?

The obvious reaction would be, no. It is racist any way you look at it. However, let us see the other side.

La Maison, run by Frenchman Philippe Lafforgue, in a part of his house at an upscale area of the capital Islamabad, has been forced to shut down after there was an outcry against this discriminatory policy. There was no board outside saying so; it was a discreet decision by the management.

As the owner stated:

“It’s not a discrimination thing. It’s a culturally sensitive thing. How can I serve pork and booze to Pakistanis without getting into trouble? So I have a rule: no locals getting in...I can’t open it up to the Pakistani people because I serve alcohol. If I start serving locals, which is obviously profitable, I will have to bribe the police…which I want to avoid.”

This last bit is important and has been ignored by the commentators. There are many in Pakistan who can afford it, and do patronise fancy restaurants. However, there is much hypocrisy regarding alcohol. Many of the elite like to show off their bars and collection of wines, but do not raise their voice against government policies over their eating and drinking habits. Their laws might discriminate against minorities, but they are quite willing to tap this segment for their quota of booze. Non-Muslims and those in the diplomatic services are their sources for tipple, although they can manage to arrange it through powerful local contacts.

Therefore, the owner is not entirely wrong when he talks about having to bribe the cops.

Is there a cultural issue that he is truly concerned about? Let us just say that the Pakistanis who might enjoy their drink at home or at private parties might put on a publicly moralistic mask. This is not a blanket judgment, but it certainly does apply to a few. Sometimes, it is pragmatism. A friend who has never hidden his lifestyle has had to hear the police knock on his door quite often.

Then, there is the sensitive issue of whether an outsider can prevent citizens of the host country from entering. Most reports have gone back in time to refer to the "Dogs and Indians not allowed" policy of British establishments during colonial rule.

There are clubs in India where certain people are not permitted even today. Depending on the portfolio of the club, politicians and film stars too have been debarred by the intellectuals and corporate sections. There is also a dress code policy; the famous artist M.F.Husain was prevented from entering the British era Willingdon Sports Club because of his footwear.

I am afraid, but I do believe that private establishments do have the luxury and right to choose their entry policies. Try dressing up scruffily and getting into the Karachi Club, or even a posh eatery in Zamzama. The hierarchy is well in place.

For that matter, at an exclusive do in Karachi, my host said he would not introduce me as an Indian because it was a cadets party. Although uncomfortable about it, I did understand his position, and was in fact grateful that he let me have a glimpse of something I would never have had.

Why would the French restaurant assume that all Pakistanis are uptight? I have been to an Italian restaurant not too far from this place and we were the only 'locals' there, if we don't consider my Indian identity.

What is particularly glaring about how this discrimination thing has worked out is that the main issue has been obfuscated. The assistant superintendent of the Islamabad Police decided to do a personal recce after getting complaints (a social media campaign, naturally). These are his words:

“So I personally called in to make a reservation, and was rejected when I said I was a Pakistani. The next step was obviously to check the place out. We found over 300 bottles of non-licensed alcohol and even a casino table.”

Lafforgue was charged with "unlicensed alcohol," a crime. Where does all talk of racism disappear? As an homily, the cop added:

“How can you live on our soil and treat us like this. No rules allow such behavior. This is not the nineteenth century.”

Part of the problem is the need to look up to foreigners. It is ingrained in the DNA of the subcontinent. The protests do not emanate from the ground, but from niche ideas of access. This too is privilege.

There is a flip side as well. Local Pakistanis, mainly young women, seek out invitations to parties at the diplomatic clubs, even though they are primarily meant for embassy staff and their families. It is another matter that they are often welcomed because they add exotica and are not inhibited.

The police have shut down the restaurant for now. It would have made sense if the registered crime was not illegal bottles of alcohol but discrimination. Unfortunately, that would be a difficult proposition. For, there is a huge mirror and it shows what Pakistanis do not wish to see.

Touché?

© Farzana Versey

---

Image: Philippe Lafforgue at his restaurant, NBC

Food for politics: a restaurant and a hug

Does anyone remember those Irani restaurants in Mumbai that had eccentric notes put up — no combing hair near wash basin, no loud chatter, and no talking politics?

The first seemed the prerogative of the owners, the second as a consideration for other diners, and the last must have been the result of some bad experience in the past. Or, perhaps the owners truly believed that eating and politics together are bad for the stomach. It is also possible that they had strong opinions and did not relish the idea that some contrary views would be expressed, leading to a 'rebel clientele'.

Likewise, when I eat out and check the bill, the last thing I want is the owner to give me political bhaashan, while cribbing about taxes. Even the grocery stores did not do so due to the LBT taxes. They went on strike. The humble vegetable vendor has no recourse and has to put up with haggling.

On Tuesday, a small eatery made news for its bill that had these words: “As per UPA govt eating money (2G, coal, CWG scam) is a necessity and eating food in AC restaurants is a luxury.”

Aditi Restaurant in Parel was forced to shut down by Congress workers for this "defamation". There is anger and there is mirth.

And with these two emotions, there seems to be no room for people breathing heavy about freedom of expression to ask:

• Who made this bill public and why?

• What are the political affiliations, if any, of the owners?

• Do customers have a right to protest against political and social messages at a place where they pay for the services?

• The bill has no tax visible. How much is it fattening the cost of the meal under the guise of taxation and keeping a bit for itself?

• Are customers of various products and services, who have chosen to pay up the extra amount, willing to put up with such a rant?

What made Narendra Modi jump in? Why was he concerned about a little eating place when he has shown scant regard for worse?

The desperation of the BJP is such that it raised the matter in the state assembly: "This is shocking. The ruling party does not want to give the people right to protest against their scams. Why is the Congress so intolerant?"

The Congress is intolerant. These scams are real. The ministers have been arrested and spent time in jail; some got away. We have courts, even if we may not agree with the verdicts. We have the Right to Information.

The restaurant owner has every right to protest against scams when there are protest rallies or through other means. He has no business sneaking in political messages only to complain about taxes. In fact, he has no business passing on his tax worries on the customer, unless a customer specifically asks him about an inflated bill.

A report said:

"The Indian Hotel and Restaurant Association (AHAR) sources said that Aditi restaurant mostly caters to poor people coming to hospitals in the area, so there were complaints about high billing due to taxes. The owner, they said, had given expression to those complaints through a footnote in the bill."

This is lame. It is an aircondioned restaurant and the tax is specifically for AC ones. How many poor people visit such places? Would those coming from hospitals be bothered? And why should anyone? They do not know in advance what to expect and only later does the message hit home while paying.

What if instead of Congress goons a visitor had protested? Some can get rowdy. Would it have made news? Perhaps. If the owner had the instinct to smell an opportunity. On the day it was shut (it reopened on Tuesday) people had already been passing around the menu, planning home delivery and later it made it to their wish list.

The episode shows that anybody can print bills with a message and get instant popularity and martyrdom.

One report in The Times of India sourced its news story from social networks. It was painful to read this:

"Some took up the communal angle. It wouldn’t have been attacked had it been an Italian or a 'Muslim-owned restaurant serving ‘secular’ food', said marketing manager Jayesh Dewana, adding that the reason it had been shut was that it served 'Hindu, pure vegetarian' fare."

Unfortunate as it is, I am sure this is not an isolated opinion. What is secular food? How many vegetarian places have been shut down? Does a restaurant have a religion?

These are people fighting for freedom? Look at how chained they are. They are the ones who run down 'Muslim' eateries for their choice of fare and assume it is some Arabisation plot. These are the ignorant who do not know that in this same city such places were destroyed in the riots of 1993.

So, let us ask some questions:

1. Would Shri Narendra Modi's men permit Muslim-owned restaurants in Gujarat to have a message against 2002 riots on the bill?

2. Would an eatery in Chhatisgarh get away by announcing it sympathises with Maoist ideology?

3. Would a Sikh at his dhabha be able to seek the support of customers to petition against Sajjan Kumar?

You know the answer.

And despite my empathy for all the above, I would not like it. I am going to eat, not be saddled with problems, even though I am more than aware of them.

This would amount to misusing a client's space and proselytising.

Don't 'charge' me for it. Hand me a pamphlet separately, if you must.

This overarching culture of protest that is gaining currency to "reach millions" through short sentences is hot air. Those protesting against the shutdown of a restaurant are usually silent when people are rounded up on 'suspicion' for crimes they never commit. It is so easy to take up the cause of safe underdogs.

The holy hug

On Sunday, at an Iftaar organised by MLA Baba Siddiqui a rather normal greeting became an 'epic moment'. Two Bollywood biggies, reportedly not the best of friends, embraced. Salman Khan and Shahrukh Khan made it to the front page of some mainstream newspapers.

I watched one such barf-inducing clip on TV two days later. This nonsense was still being talked about. Realising how important this was, the host called out to the photographers to capture it.

My views on political iftaars are not new. I abhor them. Worse, this one was at a five-star hotel. What sort of austerity is it? Then to make it into a photo-op. I was shocked when the host, obviously on asked how he felt, said he had nothing to do with it. It was all Allah, he was merely a means. I would like to know why, in that case, Allah did not intervene when they had that big fight.

Leave religion alone.

© Farzana Versey

Of Bananas and Annas

The banana revolt has been silent. For years it lived as a vegetable, although it is classified as herbaceous and would probably be snogging with basil and thyme. But when the land of the bananas was destroyed this time round in a thunderstorm, they decided that enough is enough. They marched into the legislative assembly and addressed the house.

“If grapes have been appeased, then why not us?”

The hall was silent. Indeed, grapes that had been classified as vegetables were put on a pedestal. Was it the wine lobby that pushed for it? This was elitism. The bananas had begun to rot. Farmers suffered. Even in good times, the journey from farm to market could be perilous. You can squash bananas even when they are fully clothed.

The Indian Railways provides special rakes for perishable fruits. The banana has not only succeeded in this revolt but will be given special space. It’s probably a great leap forward. It is officially a fruit now in at least one state in India.

How does one react? I always thought it was a fruit. Should we celebrate that the replenishment has now got a new feather in its cap? Will people still indulge in slapstick comedy about falling on banana peels and perhaps less decorous insinuations?

The office stretches on most Mumbai streets have carts selling what they too thought was a fruit and invariably lunchtime would see someone peeling a banana and biting into it. The banana is rarely sliced, unlike the watermelon, or garnished with salt and chilli powder like the guava. It is rare to get ecstatic over a banana’s taste. But there are banana connoisseurs – they hold it up, prod it to check on firmness and even smell it. There is some magnificent secret about the spots on it that I have not been able to figure out.

I was brought up on bananas. A bunch would rest in a large fruit plate and as in some shrine one plucked it out with reverence. I have seen offerings of bananas in temples and the leaves of banana trees are an important part of Parsi weddings, where fish is wrapped in it, braised with herbs, tied with a thread and then cooked. The leaves are also used as plates in traditional South Indian functions and it is a marvel that none of the liquid falls off.

The school tiffin could not accommodate the banana, but much to my chagrin it would be placed inside the handle with instructions to the dabbawalli (the lady who carted several tiffins) to “be careful” as though it were something precious.

In our house, we also had a caramelised banana with dried coconut, not as dessert or a snack, but as part of the main meal to be eaten with – and you may screw your nose – chapatti. We have the temerity to call it keley ka saalan (banana curry)! And guess what? I love it, especially when it is slightly burnt. The flavour is sweet-smokey.

There are other bananas that lend themselves to ‘real’ food, but we have never gone there. And now that it has been recognised as a fruit, I can say that I have always been part of the movement that made it a banana republic.

- - -

You want India corruption-free? Ho-hum. Anna Hazare’s team is now pushing it. SMSes are being sent. The government wants 25 crore people to support the Jan Lokpal Bill, so Kiran Bedi has given a number. You call from your mobile. It will disconnect after one ring and your number will be registered. This is weird and as unscrupulous as any establishment buying votes. Business houses will be happy to lend a hand because they now have to get some ‘moral’ spine and shine. There are enough fancy Gandhi topis who did the rounds the first time and will sponsor such utterly ridiculous ideas.

And for those forwarding the messages from their smartphones lounging on their sofas while watching The Simpsons, just stop simpering about fighting corruption by buying people’s support in this manner. It is no different from paying the peon a few bucks to get to the bada saab in a government office.

I repeat what I have stated earlier in The Pitfalls of Populism: Anna Hazare cannot speak on behalf of the Indian population. We can throw out the government; we cannot throw out such people/groups. If they want to get public support for a legal bill, then they have to contest elections. No other way

India’s FCUK

The French head of state may not have had the streets washed and buildings painted in his honour, but he and his wife might just get an Indian baby.

Item 1:

They went to the Salim Chishti dargah at Fatehpur Sikri and reportedly the caretaker, Peerzada Rais Mian Chishti, asked the lady, “What is your wish, your prayer?” She is supposed to have said, “Pray for my son, and pray I have another.” The news says he "gave her a red thread that she tied round her wrist, recited the ayat-ul-kursi, and blew". I don’t if it was on the thread or her forehead, as is often done.

Hai! Main maa ban-ne waali hoon

Anyhow, the papers have mentioned that the lady was veiled and there are some ‘yippee’ comments about it because you know of the French position on the veil. Well, the lady was not veiled. She had wrapped a shawl round her head, that’s it.

What’s the big deal, anyway? And why did she ask for a son? They gave her the story about how Emperor Akbar walked to the shrine to get an heir. He had an empire to run and it was years ago when patriarchy was deeply entrenched. Here we have Sarko who is funded by a cosmetics company, L’Oreal, so what’s this sonny need? He has three form earlier marriages; she has one from her previous husband. Rais Mian, like most of the custodians of shrines, are always in the limelight during such visits, and he had formed an opinion about her: “Very kind, warm-hearted and extremely family-oriented mohtarma (lady).” I gather the desire for a boy makes her family-oriented.

Fik’r mat karo, maine kaam kar diya

What he should have done is given that red thread to Sarkozy saab and not Begum sahiba and blown over his head because the Y chromosome is with him, Salim Chishti or no Salim Chishti. At least Akbar Badshah knew that. Of course, Sarko stuck to his jogging regimen to stay fit; he knows he cannot rely on a thread and the breath of a man who looks after a tomb.

Item 2:

Now that the French couple has done the rounds of the tourist sites and seen turbans everywhere, if they thought they’d get some rest and bare heads, then they are mistaken:

Government sources indicated that the contentious issue of ban on Sikh turbans in France will again be taken up with the French side. The government is expected to politely convey to Sarkozy how strongly India feels about the issue when he holds delegation-level talks with PM Manmohan Singh on Monday.

Yeh lo, ungli diya tau haath pakad liya

Out PM has done this before at other meets and mentioned how the turban is “a very essential part of the Sikh way of life”. True. However, don’t you think this should be conveyed through emissaries and not during delegation-level talks? This is especially important because the PM himself wears a turban and it would seem like he is taking advantage. As a host, he needs to be more careful.

I might also add that had APJ Abul Kalam Azad discussed the veil ban issue, it would not have been considered proper. It would have been deemed regressive. Then, any aspect of religion in which we are trapped is harking back to something that was expected for certain reasons way back in time. Sikhs do not carry swords because it is not feasible and I am not sure how many wear the kachcha (loose underwear) beneath their tight jeans or don’t trim their hair.

Item 3:

Not quite certain about choice of French cuisine or Indian, the chefs decided to do a fusion. It seemed to have appealed to the palate of the guests, though one wonders how…maybe the lady being Italian has some acceptance of farm food so this would seem like really rich. The hotel plans to name something or the other in her honour. May I suggest Carla Coq au dahi and Bruni Blanquette de gosht? Let’s not leave the man out, so the two other items can be enjoyed with stuffed Nicolas naan.

- - -

Rough translation/meanings of the captions:
1. Wow, I am gonna be a mommy
2. Don’t worry, the work has been done
3. Give him an inch and he will take a yard

Black-try dinner

 Not given to political correctness for the sake of it, I yet find the idea of a ‘blind restaurant' revolting.

It isn’t new, and has branches in a few cities. Dans le Noir (In the Black) is staffed by blind waiters and waitresses. You can only choose whether you want meat, fish or vegetables, but not specify anything more. Same goes for cocktails. You are led by a guide and the visually-impaired staff becomes your eyes.

It is completely dark and you don’t even know who you are seated next to. Once the food arrives, you are informed and then begins the battle of trying to figure out what it is.

A report says, “It’s also a great chance to break free of social convention and eat using your fingers. Those same fingers are also the only way you can tell how much wine you’re pouring into your glass.”

After fumbling and spilling and making conversation with your neighbour, when you are done, you are taken to the lit bar area where they show you what you ate and the person you discussed the food with. 60 people spend 90 minutes indulging in this charade.

I know there are quirky food places and ideas. But is this a quirk? What kind of people would pay to experience the feeling of being blind? Do these eateries assume that blind people have no choice in the matter of what they eat? The idea of diners poking into bits of food and swirling their fingers in wine glasses just demeans those who cannot see. However, I know quite a few such people and this is most certainly not how they eat and drink.

The patronising bit of them acting as guides only makes it worse. It reiterates the theory that they have to live in eternal darkness and even then must display their independence. They cannot afford not to as they have to cater to the paying customer’s whims.

What learning experience can this be when the people come out and have a good laugh? Not only is it insensitive, I wonder about the kind of idiots who cannot manage to at least know from the aroma a little bit of what they are being served.

Darkness has many meanings and manifestations. I recall a visit to some old ruined castle in the UK where the big thrill was cobwebs hanging down some caves. The highlight was that some spooky creature would leap out and frighten the hell out of you. This was for a lark, to recreate an ambience.

Dans le Noir cannot afford to play such pranks because it is toying with disability, a ‘let’s see how it feels’ situation. There is no attempt at empathy or understanding. It is a vile commercial proposition and a rather sad success story, which it appears to be from the fact that it has spread out in different cities. It reveals that very many human beings are so devoid of vision that they want to act blind when they cannot see beyond their limited worlds.

The hungry Indian army

Each time I say anything about the Indian Armed Forces, there is objection about tarring the whole army with the same brush. Yes, they say, there are scams. Yes, they say, some soldiers are bad. We talk about the spirit, about warfare, about the ability to fight, the quality of arms. What happens if a basic requirement like food comes under the scanner?

Soldiers who are supposed to be fit are being given food supplies that are well past their expiry date, to the extent of two years. Contracts are given to favoured companies without a thought to the quality and quantity of the product. Here is a part of the report from TOI:

Tabled in Parliament on Tuesday, the latest CAG report paints a dismal picture of the Army's procurement and supply of dry rations (rice, wheat, dal, sugar, tea, oil, tinned items) and fresh rations (vegetables, fruit, meat, milk), undertaken at an annual cost of Rs 1,440 crore.

As per CAG, the main villains of the piece are Army Service Corps (ASC) and Army Purchase Organization, all under the benign gaze of Army HQ and the defence ministry.

It is a fairly high-level scam obviously and the person suffering is your humble jawan. Advertisements lure young people to enlist in the army and do something for the country. Many join because of employment needs and not because they have this great desire to serve the nation. I am sorry, but that is the truth. In the course of the training, they might feel a sense of bonding with their fellow soldiers and the camaraderie and aggression instilled does often end up giving them a sense of higher purpose. This is good. However, together with the discipline of the hierarchy comes the powerlessness of those in the lower cadre. They might accept it where they know their place and are expected to take directions, but what about not getting the right food?

If you want the citizen to respect the army, then it has to respect itself. Such respect is possible if it at least does not scrimp on something as basic as sustenance. We all know about liquor and how it is sold in the market by officers. This sort of corruption can be ignored, especially if we will be shot down with the precious query, “Isn’t it rampant in other fields?” But you cannot expect soldiers to be healthy and ready to fight if they are underfed or, worse, being fed with food that could turn out to be outright spoiled all because some officer has got kickbacks on atta, dal, eggs and chicken.

And since we are told we must be thankful that terrorists have not reached our doorstep because of the army, may be ask the defence ministry why it is putting the lives of the Indian citizens at risk by placing our safety in the hands of hungry soldiers? Will human rights organisations fight for the rights of these soldiers and the health ministry conduct an independent check on the state of their wellness?

Or will attention once again be diverted to the ‘larger issue’ of the threat yapping at our borders?