Jolie's image-making

Angelina Jolie has gone to Pakistan to help the flood victims. Good enough.

But why is she dressed as though she is visiting a dargah or some holy place? And why has she been photographed with a fully-veiled woman? This is just pushing a stereotype, when people have been stripped off their belongings and have to make do with what little they have. Men, too, were affected, and many, many children. But Ms. Jolie is with this kind of woman because it makes such a huge impact.

Whereas, these women wade through the waters unconcerned about how they appear.

And there are several others who often come out in the streets to protest without their heads covered.

This is part of the image-making exercise.  Of the advanced society helping the poor and trying to be like them in a show of empathy. After Jolie leaves and gets back into her thigh-high slit gown, these women will be still seen by the world as cloaked creatures. The world will not think about those who are helping within. Or even the corruption within. Vultures overtaken by vultures.

Relief from belief

Stephen Hawking is baulking at the wrong evolutionary tree. He may choose gravity over God to rationalise the creation of the universe, but how does one explain away religion? Faith cannot be exclusive of creation, and it has provisions in it for the idea of destruction as well. Elemental and human factors come together to prop up holiness ...

Society gives no breathing space to those who do not believe in anything of a sacramental nature.

--> Full column at Express Tribune:

http://tribune.com.pk/story/47277/relief-from-belief/

The Kerala Professor and the Sharia

This is the sort of news that revolts, irrespective of the questions that will be raised.

In a gruesome incident, suspected religious extremists chopped off the right hand of TJ Joseph, a Malayalam professor at Newman’s College, under suspension since March for allegedly preparing a question paper with derogatory references to Prophet Muhammad, at Muvattupuzha in Ernakulam district on Sunday morning. The police took into custody 15 persons, reportedly activists of Islamist resistance outfit NDF (presently Popular Front of India), for questioning.

How many people were aware of such an organisation? Is the state government not supposed to keep a check on them? There were already protests in March after the question paper controversy. Why did the attackers wait till July?

There is no scope for dilly-dallying here. They had absolutely no business to harm the professor or even threaten him. If they were disturbed by the references to the Prophet, they could have used legal recourse. This group has been bundled as an Islamist outfit. Had they been true believers they would not have conducted this horrific act in the month of Ramzan. They are just criminals who probably have political aspirations.

I am aware that someone will turn around and say that they are only upholding the spirit of Islam and jihad. The BJP has jumped in already:

Demanding an NIA probe into the attack on the college professor, Kerala BJP president V Muraleedharan asked the Home Ministry not to encourage Talibanism in the State. “The Thodupuzha incident proves that Islamic terrorism has strengthened in Kerala. We are not blaming any particular outfit for that. But a tendency to nurture Talibanism should not be there,” he said in Thiruvananthapuram.

As someone quite familiar with Kerala, I can say that this was one state that seemed to be the least communal. Regionalism, too, was limited. You could hardly every tell the community to which a Keralite belonged – they speak the same language, dress in similar fashion, eat the same food. They are liberate and well-read as well. The Gulf traffic proved to be an economic boom and irrespective of what faith they believed in, they all constructed hideous-looking houses when they returned on ‘holydess’.

Would a stray Madani, who incidentally has not yet been found culpable in the Bangalore blasts case, change the attitude of the Keralite?

The chopping of the professor’s hand is a judicial matter. If this group was trying to follow the Sharia, then there is no place for it in India. They have to follow the Constitution. As I said, if the reference to the Prophet has bothered them, then they should take up the matter with the authorities. I do not know what prompted the professor to make derogatory references in a language paper. The college is a Christian one and affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University. And he was sacked. Why? Did the authorities think he had done something wrong? Was that probed? The dismissal took effect from September 1.

Who are these lumpen elements, then? Why did they wait for all these months? I hope they are arrested and given adequate punishment. More importantly, I hope they are arrested on charges of threatening, attacking and causing bodily harm.

Just as I believe they should be tried according to the Indian Constitution, their accusers should not try them in their kangaroo courts on charges of ‘Talibanism’. It’s not there in our statute books. And the family’s forgiveness in July does not count.

The case should have been solved by now. Is his dismissal more damaging? Will it get more attention?

Sunday ka Funda

“The teacher who is indeed wise does not bid you to enter the house of his wisdom but rather leads you to the threshold of your mind.”

- Kahlil Gibran

We celebrate Teacher's Day in India today. Since I hated school, I did not care much about the teachers. However, after all these years, I still recall certain aspects of their personalities.

Their faces, their clothes, their put-downs, their occasional laughter, their speech pattern, the way they enunciated words, the way they came round to inspect nails and uniform hemlines - mine had to be cut and ripped respectively, the times one bumped into them outside class, the suddenly affectionate "Good Evening, Sister" to the nun we met in our outside the school dresses...I discovered that daydreaming worked better, especially since one was ticked off for it.

I shall, however, be indebted to the physics teacher who caught me scribbling and not concentrating on her rambling. She had held up the notebook and said disgustedly, loud enough for the whole class to hear, "What is this? in my class you are writing poetry, tchhah!" I did not know that what I was writing was poetry. Her anger, her insult not only made me realise that I had created something but also that I was accepted as such before an audience!

I learned by observing, by the squeamishness I felt over cruel words, by the few times I was sent out of class, of the first flush of menstrual blood and the tightness in the chest. They tried, they followed the books.

I learned by tearing chapters and rearranging them. Perhaps I'd have been better-off had I followed the tried-and-tested ways. It just so happens that the worse-off hasn't been too bad for me.

This song is how I would like to continue to learn - by finding connections, crossed or straight:

Blaring isn't quite tony

Muaah, I am a yankee poodle

Tony Blair is the sort of guy you would take home to your pet orangutan provided your pet orangutan is upto it. Yes, of course, I refer to the former British prime minister’s confession to being an animal in bed. One marvels at his ability to keep 10 Going Down Street in fine fettle, and we shall refer to his beastly instincts in a bit.

First, his memoirs are called ‘A Journey’, and without reading it I have formed a fair opinion since it has been publicised a good deal.

It has, like most books these days, to do with publicity. In fact, he has written a six-page introduction for his transatlantic readers that says:

“The book, in many ways, is a story about America as well as, evidently, a history of my time as British PM.”

This reveals how he seems to have meshed the roles of PM with that of keeper of America’s political policies. He even audaciously writes about the US:

“Mere mortals are still inspired by a certain awe.”

I understand awe; people do admire characteristics of nations and societies and even some leaders. But, what does being mere mortals have to do with it? Are the US and its leadership god, whatever is the herd or individual definition of such a god? It is ironical, then, that the qualities he admires are based entirely on practical considerations:

“These Americans can be smart – really, really clever. Homely, folksy, in certain aspects disarmingly simple: but don’t let any of that fool you. Underneath all the pop culture, old-fashioned courtesy, Disney, McDonald’s and the rest of it, there beats a brain.”

Pop culture and the rest arise from a canny mental ability as does consumerism. You don’t get apple pie only because your heart beats for it.

“I have come to love America and what it stands for. The essential values it embodies are so much more fundamental to our fortune than even Americans themselves may appreciate. America is great for a reason. It is looked up to, despite all the criticism, for a reason. There is a nobility in the American character that has been developed over the centuries.”

Fine. If he is talking about values embodied in the Constitution; if he is talking about the everyday American. But can character be generalised? What have the British learned from the Americans? What nobility is he talking about and what centuries? It would seem he is talking about some ancient civilisation that has fought off several conquests by outside forces.

It is clear that he is not referring to the America of the people but of the politicians.

On George Bush: “The stupidest misconception was that he was stupid…He also had – has – great intuition.”

On Barack Obama: “The personal character is clear: this is a man with steel in every part of him.”


On Bill Clinton: “an extraordinary mixture of easygoing charm and ferocious intellectual capacity. Probably . . . he is the most formidable politician I ever met.”

Blair comes up with an smart analysis of the Monica Lewinsky affair. As stated in a report:

He says Mr Clinton had a curiosity in people. With men, this would result in friendship, he says, while with women there was a sexual dimension. “In this, I doubt that he is so very different from most of the male population.”

Right. This ignores the fact that the curious men are with women who might be curious themselves. They do not get the same respect in society or by the likes of Blair. He justifies Clinton’s lies as “not wanting to embarrass his family”.

Do families not understand curiosity? And it is precious that while he accepts with equanimity the affair of his minister Blunkett, he dismisses the scandal to his choice of the “wrong woman”. She was married. A woman’s marriage is a problem with this curiosity business, it would seem.

Tony Blair has had a rather interesting recollection of when he tried to rid himself of anxiety when faced with a leadership battle. I don’t know whether it is wife Cherie or his opponent Gordon Brown who can take credit for this!

“That night she cradled me in her arms and soothed me; told me what I needed to be told; strengthened me; made me feel that what I was about to do was right... On that night of the 12th May, 1994, I needed that love Cherie gave me, selfishly.

“I devoured it to give me strength, I was an animal following my instinct, knowing I would need every of emotional power and resilience to cope with what lay ahead. I was exhilarated, afraid and determined in roughly equal quantities.”

If there is a potent connection between sex and politics, then this is it. More importantly, Blair has done it with tremendous delicacy. Selfishness and instinct are married rather well. It is also a great analogy for the survival need that regresses to evolve to withering heights.

Accidental communalism?

Now road rage and drunken driving have been included in the hall of communal fame. It is beyond disgusting. A businessman rammed his car into a scooter, killing the pillion rider and grievously injuring the rider. His blood sample revealed 16 times higher than the normal limit of alcohol. Clear case of drunken driving. He is permitted bail. However, the police do not want him out and made a remand application that states:

“Not only would there be communal riots, the Muslim community shall stop believing in law.”

The reason given is that the driver is Hindu and the victim a Muslim. It is natural for the victim’s family to be angry, just as the culprit will get himself a good defence lawyer. Where do Hindu and Muslim come in here? Or are they being overly protective of the culprit?

A while ago Nooriya Haveliwalla, also drunk and reportedly on drugs, killed two people and injured four cops. She is Muslim. There was no talk about a flare-up. Salman Khan’s infamous accident killed a Muslim, so no communal tension.

The victim’s family is complaining about the culprit’s rashness, which all of us should. Anyone could have been killed, including the driver. The court has dismissed the police statement as frivolous, but it reveals the mindset that I spoke about in the article below. Are we to believe that Muslims will riot for every darn thing when they are often victims of those riots? As for the tepid afterthought about ‘stop believing in the law’ it only indicates that there is a belief that Muslims will take the matter in their own hands.

I think the police officers where this remand application has come from need to be taken to task and a case of defamation filed against them.

Obama Talkin'

Mr. President why do you say you have a funny name?

“Well, they think so.”

How do you know?

“I mean the place where I was senator is called Illinois, so what do you expect?”

Then aren’t they the funny ones? Or shall we say 'ill' and 'annoy'ing?

“They are projecting.”

So, are you a Muslim?

“Moslem, Moslem, that’s how we say it here, with a zee sound and an ‘o’, like Mozambique.”

Were you born in Kenya?

“I would say that I can’t spend all my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead.”

It isn’t about your birth certificate but your roots.

“That would be Hawaii.”

Hawaii is a place, but your origin, your ancestry is more than that.

“Is it? I thought I talked about change. Change means getting out of the old.”

But you are still following Bush’s agenda. You are still in Iraq, in Afghanistan. Maybe it is the Muslim in you.

“Those are just rumours. I don’t believe that Pew Research Centre poll."

That 18 per cent Amercians think you are Muslim. What’s wrong with that?

“The facts are the facts. So, it’s not something that I can I think spend all my time worrying about. I don’t think the American people want me to spend all my time worrying about it.”

But you are tetchy about it.

“You know, there is a mechanism, a network of misinformation that in a new media era can get churned out there constantly. We dealt with this when I was first running for the US senate. We dealt with it when we were first running for the Presidency.”

At that time you called yourself Barack Hussein Obama.

“I did?”

Yes. You even swot a fly in a TV studio.

“Yeah, that must have been a conspiracy. Like this survey.”

There will be several factors that surveys may throw up; that you like broccoli, you look good without your shirt on, you need to get out of Afghanistan. These are a part of your identity. So why does that 18 percent make you dodgy?

“If I spend all my time chasing after that then I wouldn’t get much done.”

All those drones to be managed. Swimming along the Gulf Coast. You are indeed a busy man.

“Yeah, it ain’t easy bicycling in Martha’s vineyard, too.”

I can imagine. Not when they think you know Martha.