Do we need to switch off our television sets?

In popular vocabulary Television is also many a times referred to as ‘Idiot Box’. I would argue that it is not justified to endow human characteristics on a non-living entity. A television set only works on the GIGO principle (Garbage In, Garbage Out). More the garbage is fed to it, more the garbage it will spit out. Unfortunately, the amount of garbage that is being thrown into it is on an exponential increase. Not only that, while at least some of us may have begun to segregate the physical garbage that accumulates at our places of residence into various useful categories like ‘Wet waste’, ‘Dry waste’ etc., to be treated in the relevant manner, all such precaution is thrown to the wind while feeding garbage to this inanimate box. So, even the most basic principle of categorization that one could think of, for example, a segregation between what should qualify as ‘News’, as against what should qualify as ‘Entertainment’, completely breaks down in this case. A new category has instead come to be formulated and well-established, that of ‘News for Entertainment’.

In the erstwhile days, before the onset of the ’24-hour news channels’ phenomenon, there used to exist a concept of ‘News-worthiness’. Anything and everything could not qualify as ‘News’. The most pressing issues concerning polity, economy, national and world affairs, sports etc., formed a part of a ‘News-bulletin’. However, with privatization in the media industry, more and more news channels started setting up shops. The News channels soon acquired a 24*7 character. They were as much a part of the blinding TRP race as any other ‘Entertainment’ channel. With these changes, the character of the ‘News’ channels also started merging with that of ‘Entertainment’ channels, so much so that today, there is hardly any parameter left based on which the two categories can be kept apart. For all practical purposes, they have merged into one single entity. The ‘News’ channels today air programs of the likes of ‘Saas, Bahu aur Saazish’. I guess the name is in itself enough to warrant any further explanation of what the content of the program might be. I would not even dare to venture to comment on the ‘news-worthiness’ of this program.

So, while the nation and the world may be undergoing an existential crisis, in terms of the grave situation prevailing as a consequence of environmental, political, economic and social challenges staring the society in its face, shouting out loud for human beings, the genesis of this crisis, to get together and indulge in healthy discussions in order to diffuse all these self-created crisis at least to some extent, the best that a television news channel has to offer us as its prime time weekend show is the story of a worthless spat between two Bollywood film stars. Such is the toxic extent to which the garbage thrown into the box has degenerated.

Whether or not one needs to switch off one’s television set is left to the individual choice, however, the nature of what one is viewing on these sets needs to be understood and internalized in the correct perspective, by each and every individual choosing to keep them switched on.

The Unbearable Heaviness of Being

I recently came across a novel by the name “The Unbearable Lightness of Being”, by Milan Kundera. I haven’t as yet read it but its title immediately reminded me of my own ‘unbearable heaviness of being’. The immediate context was an incident I happened to hear from a friend. It might just be a very commonplace incident, would have and could have occurred with almost anyone, but it just strung a chord inside me, reminding me of the shabby and ugly realities that one has to constantly encounter and struggle with, just so that one can keep on breathing in this world.

The incident had to do with a friend of my friend who is working with a public sector organization, ostensibly known to be completely honest by character. Organizations have an identity and a life of their own. Every organization has its own typical culture unique to itself. It has a certain central character that defines it and identifies it to the world. The central character of this organization, holding it apart in the world, was its honesty and integrity. Whatever else one could blame it for, the people at large, in the outside world, were convinced that this organization harbored and nurtured a culture of honesty. I too believed so, up until I heard this incident concerning the friend of my friend.

Just like most people are, this girl was super-excited and filled with a feeling of pride when she got selected into this prestigious organization. She could not believe that she had actually made it. She assumed her duties with utmost sincerity, along with that initial excitement of acquiring a job that fills one with an endless supply of energy, the exhilarating spirit of finally being able to do something and the heady feeling of being able to contribute one’s bit towards the whole scheme of things, albeit, honestly and sincerely.

As she gradually got acquainted with the organization, however, her ecstatic spirits started to slowly dim. She realized that her work was of a mundane nature, failing to offer her any source of excitement or enjoyment. The nature of the organization was quite hierarchical failing to enthuse her and pushing her into a routine of a lackluster boredom. However, despite this, the one part that she still did-not doubt was the honesty, the integrity of the organization and its people.

Years passed by so, and she got a change of department, new work, new people. She was enjoying this change, may be for the very same reason that it was at least a change, even if nothing more. Things were moving on fine. Then it happened. As a part of her job, she came across a case that she thought needed a certain kind of treatment. She worked really hard, got hold of the facts and proudly put up her findings to her seniors, her utter belief in the ‘honesty’ and ‘integrity’ of the organization and its officers egging her on.

And then it all started, first politely and indirectly, and then completely openly. The pressure on her to succumb, the bargaining tactics (as if it was a vegetable market where she was selling vegetables, and not a reputed organization that was duty bound to serve the interests of the people), the covert and over suggestions to just gloss things over, save the powerful and the corrupt, as it happens everywhere, she experienced all of it. And she then realized the depth of the rot in the organization. She also realized here helplessness in the entire scheme of things. Her one remaining belief, one factor that was standing out, enabling her survival in this gloomy world, was mercilessly shattered to pieces. And now she is trying to cope, to come to terms and to survive with this ‘unbearable heaviness of being’.

It may seem to the reader that this small incident, which may be occurring and recurring with thousands of individuals every day, is unworthy of such elaborate description and for penning a full article on. However, this penning down is a cathartic act, that allows one to survive these shattering to pieces of one’s beliefs, dreams and ideologies, and still survive in this murky world of pretenses, injustice and unfairness. Secondly, such incidents offer a reality check and expose the grave depths to which the rot has taken roots. Thirdly, and related to the second reason, such incidents, thus, prepare one for the long struggle that lies ahead. A struggle and a fight that will have to be fought each and every day, in whatever form it chooses to confront one. As much as they rock one’s conscience and affect one’s personalities, as much as they remind one once more of the ‘unbearable heaviness of being’, they keep one focused and rejuvenated, constantly reminding of the goals ahead and the long and thorny path that has to be traversed to reach those goals, and renewing one’s strength once the initial shock of the situation has subsided.

कुछ बात उन गैरों की

वो कहते हैं जिस सरज़मीं की नींव ही नफ़रतों पर टिकी है उसके वजूद को नापाक कहना ही सच्चा है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि उन नफ़रतों के लिए अपनी भी ज़िम्मेदारी से उन्हों ने इतनी आसानी से मुंह फ़ेरा कैसे है

वो कहते हैं कि हमसे मुसलसल जंग-ए-ऐलान करना ही उस क़ौम का मक़सद है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि करोड़ों इंसान जाने एक ही मक़सद से ज़िंदा कैसे हैं

वो कहते हैं कि मुसलमान लफ़्ज़ से ही हमें एक गैरियत का एहसास होना लाज़मी है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि हर मुसलमान जो हमें मिला इतनी अपनाइयत से मिला क्यूँ है

वो कहते हैं कि अकबर हो या औरंगज़ेब या कि तेमूर ही हो सब एक थे कुचला उन्होने हमें सदियों तक है

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि जो अपने बताए जाते हैं उनसे इतना दर्द और खौफ़ का एहसास मिला क्यूँ है

वो कहते हैं कि इतनी तेज़ी से बढ़ रहे हैं वो कि दूर नहीं वो दिन जब इस सरज़मीं फिर उनका ही राज होगा

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि उनकी तो सुकून भरी ज़िंदगी की छोटी सी ख्वाइश भी एक दुआ भर है

वो कहते हैं कि अमन की चाहत तो हमें भी है पर चैन वो कभी लेने ही नहीं देते

हम तो ये ही सोचते रह गए कि चैन-ओ-अमन की दरकार करने वालों के दिलों में नफ़रतों का घरौंदा जाने बसा क्यूँ है..... नफ़रतों का घरौंदा जाने बसा क्यूँ है.....

 

Common-sense vs sociological understanding of caste inequality in India

My ‘common sense understanding’ of ‘caste inequality in India’

I was born in a relatively upper-middle class Brahmin Hindu family. I mostly stayed in urban areas and studied in convent or high-profile public schools. My parents are well-educated (both post-graduates) and I was always well-provided for.

My earlier understanding of the phenomenon of ‘caste’ in India was mostly influenced by this background and socio-economic status I was born with. Since the time I had some understanding of this phenomenon, I thought of it as a societal structure that has existed in the Indian society since ages. Although, I did-not endorse it and was superficially aware of it being an unjust system, as it ascribed a social status to an individual solely on the basis of birth, I never really dwelt very deeply on it, as I never had any first-hand encounter with its actual functioning in the society. Through my interactions with my family, and the members of the society I moved in, I was always led to believe that caste inequality was a phenomenon of the past, and the reservation policy had actually been instrumental in a reversing of the inequality, with Brahmins and other higher castes being in a vulnerable position today and the lower castes reaping all the benefits. It was always portrayed as a battle of ‘meritocracy’ vs. ‘reservations’, where, due to vote-bank politics, ‘reservations’ were winning hands down with a severe blow to the principle of ‘meritocracy’.

Another distinguishing memory that I have of ‘caste’ is the injunction that was placed on me by my family that I was allowed to marry anyone that I liked with only two exceptions; the boy I chose should neither be from a ‘low’ caste, (especially should not be outside the so-called ‘twice-born’ castes), nor a non-Hindu. Other than this prohibition on marriage, I never observed anyone in my family practicing any other type of caste discrimination with anyone in the society, but my marriage into a ‘low’ caste was out of question.

My family always valued education and encouraged me to read, but another thing that now strikes me is that though I was encouraged to read Mahatma Gandhi, Swami Vivekananda and the like, I was never introduced to the writings of Ambedkar, or Jyotiba Phule or the like. I only knew Dr. Ambedkar as the person who drafted the Indian Constitution, and left with us a legacy of the ‘reservation system’, that penalized ‘merit’ and ‘rewarded’ mediocrity. Although, in my personal life, I never suffered any ‘discrimination’ because of the ‘evil of reservation’, I still came to believe that it was a profoundly unjust way of addressing the ‘caste’ issue and was completely against the principle of ‘merit’. My views completely coincided with the views of Mr. N.R Narayan Murthy, the former Chairman of Infosys, when he says, “I firmly believe that there is considerable social injustice in the country and that we have to help the disadvantaged people to overcome this. The solution is not reservations in education or in employment. The solution is to make the disadvantaged people more competition worthy than they are today” (Upadhaya, 2007).

 

 

My ‘sociological understanding’ of ‘caste inequality in India’

 

I have written all of the above in the ‘past’ tense, as studying Sociology, although to a limited extent, has brought about a significant change in my thoughts on the issue of ‘caste’. As a sociological concept, I have been able to discern a few major characteristics of ‘caste’ as it prevails in India. These (may not be exhaustive) are:

 

1. The closed nature of the system, with concrete boundaries and negligible mobility
2. The concept of ‘purity’ and ‘pollution’ associated with it
3. A hierarchical system
4. An ‘ascriptive’ system (based on birth)
5. Ritual authority
6. Preserved through the rules of ‘endogamy’

 

I am most inclined and convinced with the arguments put forward by Dr. Ambedkar, on the genesis and mechanism of caste. According to him, ‘caste in India means an artificial chopping off of the population into fixed and definite units, each one prevented from fusing into another through the custom of endogamy. Thus the conclusion is inevitable that endogamy is the only characteristic that is peculiar to caste’ (Ambedkar, 2002). The caste system is maintained and perpetuated by the system of ‘endogamy’, i.e., marriage within the same caste. As Dr. Ambedkar highlights, endogamy is used in combination with exogamy, with the result that an individual shall marry within the same caste but outside one’s ‘gotra’ (Ambedkar, 2002). The castes, thus, maintain their exclusivity with strict implementation of these rules of marriage and any deviation to these rules is seen as a threat to the ‘social order’ that these rules seek to maintain. According to me, this exclusivity is especially and strictly sought to be maintained in case of the distinction between ‘higher twice-born’ castes and the ‘lower Shudra’ castes. My personal experience also corroborates this view, where there were strict restrictions on my marriage outside the ‘twice-born’ castes.

 

After independence, discrimination on the basis of caste has been constitutionally prohibited. Untouchability has been outlawed. However, these measures have not succeeded in rooting out this evil from the hearts and minds of the people. Though there are no overt restrictions on people on the basis of their castes, yet this system of inherent inequality thrives on. The justification many a times given by the ‘higher’ castes is that this system is only based on ‘mutual interdependence’ and ‘difference’ rather than on ‘inequality’. However, this is a pretty precarious position to take as ‘in actual practice, there is a profound inequality between the castes in terms of productive resources, social status and access to knowledge’ (Chakravarti, 2006).

 

The debates around reservations are an apt example to prove this point. In common sense parlance, any reservation policy enacted to benefit the lower castes is pitted against its adverse effects on ‘meritocracy’. However, there are certain inherent flaws in this argument. An article I read, by V. Sanil, very deftly challenges the ‘myth of merit’ (Sanil). Any conception of ‘merit’ can be justified and worthy only if it meets certain prerequisite conditions, those of equal opportunity and equal playing field for all. Even here, the challenge is to address the differences in the socio-economic-cultural status of individuals that prevail in the society. Any notion of ‘equality of opportunity’ is a farce until and unless it also addresses the differences in ‘cultural capital’ between individuals. For example, the IT industry prides itself on being caste neutral and based solely on the principle of merit. However, as stated by Carol Upadhaya, ‘Data from our study and several others suggest that most software engineers come from middle class, educated families. Taking parents’ education and occupation as a proxy for socioeconomic class (in the absence of reliable income data), our survey of software professionals in Bangalore found that 80 per cent of their fathers had graduate degrees or above, while only three respondents (out of 132) had fathers with less than SSLC level education. In addition, 56 per cent of respondents’ mothers were graduates or above. Another survey of 102 software engineers in Bangalore yielded similar findings: 77 per cent of respondents’ fathers had graduate or postgraduate degrees and all of the remainder had at least completed high school. The mothers in this sample were similarly highly educated, most up to high school level and half with graduate degrees’ (Upadhaya, 2007). Thus, ‘merit’ becomes a meaningless term when the input conditions for all are not equal.

 

Another aspect which is highlighted by anti-reservationists is that it benefits only the ‘creamy layer’ from the lower castes. However, as Weisskopf concludes, ‘that reservations tend to benefit a creamy layer of SC and ST students does not mean they are failing in achieving their objectives. They should be understood, instead, as an effort to promote integration of the upper strata of society – by increasing the access of highly disadvantaged and under-represented communities to elite occupations and decision-making positions’ (Weisskopf, 2004).

 

However, I would like to add here that reservations need to work in tandem with addressing the sources of caste inequality and striking at them. As Satish Deshpande writes in one of his articles, I too believe that the onus is on the sociologists, with their subject-matter expertise and the technical and deep understanding of the issue of ‘caste’ and the inequalities it perpetuates, to put the entire issue into perspective and then steer the debates around it in the direction that ultimately promises to reach to at least a semblance of the solution. This, as Deshpande states, would be a two-step process, firstly, focusing attention on the contemporaneity of caste inequality, and secondly, researching the mechanisms by which caste inequalities are reproduced (Deshpande). This would mean an open and transparent discussion on the ‘caste’ question, as it exists in today’s society and the various forms that it takes. It would mean a re-analysis of the criteria of castes, a study of the current status of particular castes as against their historic status and so on and so forth. In short, it would mean bringing out this issue into the open rather than brushing it under carpets and pretending as if it does-not exist.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Ambedkar, B. (2002). Castes in India. In V. R. (ed.), The Essential Writings of B.R. Ambedkar (pp. 241-262). Delhi: Oxford University Press.

Chakravarti, U. (2006). Understanding Caste. In U. Chakravarti, Gendering Caste : Through a Feminist Lens (pp. 6-24). Calcutta: Stree.

Deshpande, S. (n.d.). Confronting Caste Inequality : What Sociologists Must Do To Reorient Social Policy.

Sanil, V. (n.d.). What is Merit.

Upadhaya, C. (2007, May 19). Employment Exclusion and Merit in the Indian IT Industry. Economic and Political Weekly, pp. 1863-1868.

Weisskopf, T. E. (2004, September 25). Impact of Reservation on Admissions to Higher Education on India. Economic and Political Weekly, pp. 4339-4349.

 

The Ghost Colony

“Rukhsaar! Rukhsaar!”.....Rashida was running as fast as her 12 year old legs could carry her. She was out of breath by the time she reached her home.

“What happened? Why are you looking so distraught?” Rukhsaar enquired urgently.

Not waiting to calm her breath, Rashida blurted out…..They are coming…They are coming….

These words were enough to numb Rashida’s 16 year old elder sister. A look of terror engulfed her face. Realizing, however, that every second was now precious, and that she did-not have even a moment to waste, Rukhsaar ran towards the kitchen of their humble dwelling, which, however, was their ‘home’. There, her mother was preparing lunch. She briefed her quickly, after which she hurriedly started packing their meagre belongings, paying attention to not forget all the important documents – the documents, in the absence of which they could be declared as dead, or not even born, or foreigners, or aliens, or God knows what!

In the meantime, her mother started to make frantic calls to her husband and her son….both had gone on some errands. The family had in-fact been very excited recently. The festive season had already set-in. Rukhsaar’s brother, Sahir, was a performer par excellence. He was a part of the local ‘Drama Company’ that was formed by the youth of the locality. They used to perform street plays for a living. In the festive season, especially close to Deepawali, they used to conduct Ram Leela in and around their locality. His earnings used to double. Sahir always used to perform the role of Raavan. Apart from the immense potential that playing this character provided him, in terms of displaying his acting skills, he was somehow also drawn towards the nuances that this character possessed. He was enamored by the wealth of knowledge that Raavan possessed, by his immense strength and valour that always became more pronounced in the face of adversities, by his brutal honesty and integrity of character which he chose not to compromise even in the face of death, by his fearless choice of choosing to be in a minority over a majority, of standing tall to be burned down not once, but year after year, in the name of a so-called victory of ‘good over evil’, and of his spirit of forgiveness, that always allowed him to forgive this faceless and nameless majority, for he knew that most of them were not vile but misguided.

Their father worked at a construction site nearby. The site was close to their ‘home’ but even closer to the ‘home’ of the most deserving man that this nation had ever produced. He was the first among equals. Sahir’s father had once toyed with the idea of getting his son’s name changed to Mukesh. He had thought there was some kind of magic in that name, some kind of a secret which could be unveiled only if he could get hold of that name. Somehow, this thought had passed just as it arose. But he still used to wonder many a times if the people of this name also had to prove that they had been born, that they were still alive and that they were also human beings, forever wishing to be treated so.

The phone calls had made both Sahir and his father rush home. By the time they reached back, however, they saw Rashida, Rukhsaar and mother standing over the rubble of what once was their ‘home’. Rukhsaar was clutching on to the documents as if those were their biggest lifelines, Rashida was holding on to her only doll (she had possessed it since she was three years old – it was her only companion to play with), while mother was sitting atop the remains of what once was the only double-bed the family possessed.

As soon as the exercise was complete however, the family started to move off, along with many others like them, towards the makeshift ‘houses’ that were being provided to them. These were, in fact, just tents strewn on the vast expanse of the bare land that was near the garbage dump. For the next, ‘officially’ two year, these were to be their ‘homes’.

One would have imagined that they would be beyond grief at this time, what with their ‘home’ being razed to the ground right in front of their eyes. However, they did-not have any expressions on their faces. They did-not scream or shout. They did-not cry. They did-not protest. They just walked off, albeit, with their heads held high.

Once in their new ‘home’, Rukhsaar thought of once verifying whether she had brought along all the documents. She jumped with horror on seeing that, somehow, her father’s ‘Basic’ card was missing from the set of documents.

It was called as ‘Basic’ card because your existence was based on whether you possessed this card or not. In the absence of this, you could no longer get ration from the fair price shops, you could not own a ‘home’, an electricity connection, a telephone (immobile or mobile). You could not work or go to a doctor, or a banker. In fact, you were no longer a ‘living’ or ‘human’ entity. You could as well be driven out (who knows from where), or silenced or dumped, for you were anyway not one of the recognized two billion citizens of the nation now. You had anyway never been a human, you were not even a recognized and breathing ‘non-human’ now.

For years and years thereafter, the struggle continued. The struggle that the father is allowed to breathe as a human being again. The struggle to be recognized as someone more than a ghost. Requests, due procedures, undue procedures, nothing worked.

Years after, however, the father still breathes on, with a newfound identity, that of a ghost, visible to everyone’s eyes but invisible to the minds. He is not alone though. There are many like him. They are still put up in the ‘makeshift’ tents. The ‘official’ two years are not yet over. Anyway, they have forgotten all about it, long back losing even an iota of hope that these ‘two years’ will ever be over. The people, however, thought of naming this new colony, of providing the dignity of a name to their new ‘homes’. So now this place is called ‘The Ghost Colony’.

 

‘प्रेत-आत्माओं की बस्ती’

“रुख्सार! रुख्सार!” बारह वर्षीय रशीदा हाँफती हुई, अपने घर की ओर दौड़ रही थी और ज़ोर ज़ोर से अपनी बड़ी बहन को पुकार रही थी।

“क्या हुआ? बांवरी हो गयी है क्या? इतनी ज़ोर-ज़ोर से क्यूँ चिल्ला रही है?” रुख्सार ने कुछ चिंतित स्वर में पूछा।

रशीदा हाँफते हुए, आतंकित स्वर में बोली, “वो आ रहे हैं.....वो आ रहे हैं”....

ये चार शब्द सुनकर सोलह वर्षीय रुख्सार स्तब्ध रह गयी। कुछ क्षणों के लिए वह जैसे सुन्न हो गयी हो। उसके मुंह से कोई आवाज़ नहीं निकली। फिर अकस्मात शायद उसको इस बात की स्मृति हो आई कि उसके पास अब ज़्यादा वक्त नहीं है। यह सोचकर वह अपने छोटे से घर के बावरचीखाने कि ओर भागी, जहां उसकी अम्मी खाना पका रही थी। उसने अम्मी को पूरी बात का संक्षिप्त वर्णन दिया और जल्दी जल्दी सामान बांधने लग गयी। वह इस बात का खास ख़याल रख रही थी कि घर में किसी से भी संबधित कोई भी ज़रूरी दस्तावेज़ न पीछे छूट जाये। वह यह सोचकर भी कांप जाती थी कि ऐसा होने पर क्या हो सकता था, शायद वे मरे हुए घोषित कर दिये जाएँ, या यह भी माना जा सकता था कि वे कभी पैदा ही नहीं हुए थे, या कि वो इस मुल्क के रहवासी ही नहीं है, या जाने क्या क्या। वह इसकी कल्पना भी नहीं करना चाहती थी।

इसी बीच अम्मी घबराहट में अपने पति और बेटे को फोन मिलाये जा रही थी, जो कुछ काम से घर के बाहर गए थे। पूरा परिवार आजकल बहुत ही खुश था। त्योहारों का मौसम जो शुरू हो गया था। रुखसार का भाई साहिर, एक आला दर्ज़े का कलाकार था। वह स्थानीय नाटक मंडली का हिस्सा था, जो कि मुहल्ले के कुछ युवाओं और युवतियों ने मिलकर बनाई थी। वह जीविका हेतु गलियों और नुक्कड़ों पे नाटकों का प्रदर्शन किया करते थे। जब दीवाली नज़दीक आती थी तो वे अपने मुहल्ले और आस-पास के मुहल्लों में राम-लीला का नाटकीकरण किया करते थे। उस समय साहिर की रोज़ की कमाई दोगुनी हो जाया करती थी।

राम लीला में साहिर हमेशा रावण की भूमिका ही निभाता था। इसका एक कारण तो यह था कि अपने अभिनय की कला को पूर्ण रूप से निखारने में और प्रदर्शित करने में, उसे रावण के पात्र को निभाने से अत्यंत सहायता मिलती थी। मगर इससे अधिक महत्वपूर्ण कारण कुछ और था। साहिर हमेशा से ही रावण के किरदार से बहुत प्रभावित था। उसे रावण के किरदार की अनेक खूबियों के प्रति आकर्षण था। वह उसके अतुल्य ज्ञान, बल और पराक्रम, तथा उसकी ईमानदारी और प्रामाणिकता की बहुत कद्र करता था। ये ऐसे गुण थे जो उसने मौत के डर से भी कभी नहीं त्यागे। वह इस बात से अत्यंत प्रभावित था कि रावण ने भीड़ का हिस्सा न बनकर उससे अलग खड़े रहने की हिम्मत दिखाई। वह उसकी क्षमा कर देने की असीमित शक्ति से प्रभावित था। एक बार नहीं बल्कि हर साल वह जलाए जाने के लिए अपना सीना तान के तैयार हो जाता था। और हर बार कथाकथित ‘अच्छाई की बुराई पर विजय’ के प्रतीक के रूप में जला दिये जाने के बाद भी, इस बेनाम और बेचहरा भीड़ को माफ कर देता था, शायद इसलिए कि वह जानता था कि ये सब लोग दिल के बुरे नहीं, केवल पथभ्रष्ट थे।

साहिर के अब्बा पास ही एक निर्माण स्थल पर कार्यरत थे। वह निर्माण स्थल उनके घर के पास तो था ही पर इस देश के सबसे ‘योग्य और काबिल’ व्यक्ति के आलिशान घर के भी बहुत करीब था। यह व्यक्ति इस देश के सभी मनुष्यों में श्रेष्ठतम था। अब्बा ने एक बार सोचा था कि साहिर का नाम बदल के ‘मुकेश’ रख दें। उन्हें लगा था कि शायद सारा जादू इस नाम में ही है। जैसे कि ये नाम ही उनकी सारी मुश्किलों को दूर करने का एकमात्र उपाय है। उन्हे लगा था कि शायद इस देश का सबसे शक्तिशाली व्यक्ति होने के लिए ये नाम होना सबसे ज़रूरी था। साहिर का नाम, हालांकि, साहिर ही रहा। पर आज भी अब्बा को ये खयाल अक्सर आता था कि क्या ‘मुकेश’ नाम के व्यक्तियों को भी अपने ज़िंदा होने का अथवा अपने इंसान होने का प्रमाण बार बार देते रहना पड़ता होगा, सिर्फ इसलिए ताकि वो केवल दो घड़ी चैन से सांस ले सकें?

अम्मी के फोन के बाद अब्बा और साहिर तुरंत ही घर आ गए थे। फिर भी, उनको पहुँचने में इतनी देर ज़रूर हो गयी थी कि उन्होने अम्मी, रुखसार और रशीदा को अपने गिरा दिये गए घर के मलवे पे खड़ा हुआ पाया। रुखसार ने सभी दस्तावेज़ कसके अपने हाथों में जकड़े हुए थे, मानो वे दस्तावेज़ ही उनके जीवन का आधार हों। रशीदा अपनी एकमात्र गुड़िया को पकड़े खड़ी थी, जो तब से उसके पास थी जब उसकी आयु तीन वर्ष की थी। अम्मी घर के इकलौते पलंग के मलवे पर बैठी हुई थी।

जैसे ही सभी घर मलवे में परिवर्तित हो गए, सभी परिवारों ने अपने ‘नए’ घरों की ओर चलना शुरू कर दिया। शासकीय दृष्टिकोण से अगले दो बरस तक ये तम्बू ही, जो कि शहर के सबसे बड़े कचरे के ढेर के पास वाली खाली ज़मीन पर गाढ़े गए थे, उनका घर होने वाले थे।

साधारणतः यह प्रतीत हो सकता है कि इस समय इन लोगों के दुख की कोई सीमा नहीं होगी। पर सभी, शून्य चेहरों से, चुपचाप, चलते चले जा रहे थे। उनकी आँखों में न तो आँसू ही थे, न ही होंठों पे कोई शिकायत। पर हाँ, चलते समय उनका सिर ऊंचा और सीना ताना हुआ था।

जब वे अपने नए ‘घर’ में पहुंचे, तो रुखसार ने दस्तावेज़ों को संभाल कर रख देने से पहले यह जांच लेना बेहतर समझा कि सभी दस्तावेज़ पूरे हैं कि नहीं। उसके मुंह से दहशत भरी एक चीख निकली जब उसने पाया कि उसके अब्बा का ‘बुनियादी’ कार्ड दस्तावेज़ों में नहीं था।

इस कार्ड को ‘बुनियादी’ कार्ड इसलिए कहा जाता था क्यूंकि आपके अस्तित्व की बुनियाद इस बात पर टिकी हुई थी कि आपके पास यह कार्ड है कि नहीं। इसकी गैर-मौजूदगी में आपको राशन की दुकान पर राशन दिये जाने से इंकार किया जा सकता था, आपको अपना घर, बिजली, पानी, फोन के कनैक्शन इत्यादि, कुछ भी नहीं मिल सकते थे। आप काम नहीं कर सकते थे, बैंक में खाता नहीं खुलवा सकते थे, यहाँ तक कि अस्पताल में ईलाज भी नहीं करवा सकते थे। वास्तव में, आपको ज़िंदा इन्सानों की श्रेणी से निष्कासित कर दिया जाता था। आप अब इस देश के 120 करोड़ लोगों में से एक नहीं थे। वैसे भी आपको कभी इंसान तो नहीं ही माना गया था, अब सांस लेते हुए गैर-इन्सानों में भी आपकी गिनती नहीं हो सकती थी।

इसके बाद सालों-साल संघर्ष जारी रहा। इस बात के लिए संघर्ष की अब्बा को फिर से इन्सानों में शामिल कर लिया जाए। कानूनी या गैर-कानूनी, किसी भी तरीके से ये नहीं हो सका।

तथापि, सालों बाद, आज भी अब्बा की सांसें चल रही हैं। उन्होने एक नयी पहचान अपना ली है – एक प्रेत-आत्मा की, एक ऐसी प्रेत-आत्मा जो आँखों से तो सबको दिखती हैं पर दिमाग में दर्ज नहीं की जाती। इस नयी पहचान के साथ सांस लेने वाले वे अकेले नहीं है। इस बस्ती में बहुत से ऐसे लोग हैं। दो साल कब खतम हुए इन्हे अब तो ये याद भी नहीं है। इसी तंबुओं की बस्ती को इन सब ने अपना घर मान लिया है। और कहीं घर दिये जाने की आशा तो उन्हे नहीं रही, पर हाँ, उनको ये ज़रूरी लगा कि वो इस बस्ती को एक नाम और पहचान प्रदान करें। तो अब ये बस्ती ‘प्रेत-आत्माओं की बस्ती’ के नाम से मशहूर है।

 

Unravelling the ‘Standardization’ Conundrum

In their quest for demystifying life, human beings have resorted to a variety of strategies, such as categorization, codification, generalization, etc. It seems to me that standardization is one such strategy that is employed by the human race, for want of a better reason that I could locate, to be able to make a better sense of the various stimuli that compete with each-other to attract its attention. This is what I think is the rationale behind the dire need that is felt by the human race to standardize.

On another level, if we look at the history of this global movement towards standardization, we will be able to locate its linkages with the processes of industrialization, imperialism, capitalism and finally, globalization.

The 18^th century Industrial Revolution was marked by a shift from small-scale, home based, non-standardized manufacturing to manufacturing on a mass-scale with the help of standardized machinery. Frederick Taylor, through his ‘Principles of Scientific Management’, made efficiency the buzzword, which was to be achieved through the standardization of processes and work-flow techniques.

This mechanization and standardization sufficiently aided the imperialistic powers in further consolidating their hold on the territories controlled and administered by them. The growth and progress in standardization on the one hand sounded the death knell for small-scale, diversified and localized industry and processes, on the other.

The end of the imperial era led to a bipolar world for some time, the bipolarity giving way to a unipolar world after the breakdown of the Soviet Union. This breakdown coincided with the death of socialism, the breakdown of USSR being portrayed as an undeniable proof of the failure of the system (whether it actually was or not, is another question altogether. In fact, this instinct of trying to portray things as simple cause-effect phenomena is yet another proof of the human urge to simplify things). This unipolar world, dominated by the USA, established capitalism as the victorious ideology that could no longer be challenged, and was established as the only operative world ideology.

The interpretation of capitalism that dominates the world today looks at straitjacketed ‘one size fits all’ solutions to everything. It is assumed that entire societies and people driven by the economic imperative, pushing into background the social, moral and the humanitarian imperatives.

There is now a standardized definition of growth and a single interpretation of development. These can be measured with the help of standardized indexes and scales. Standardized rating agencies can then arrive at a ranking for nations, based on the scores achieved on these standardized scales.

And finally, all of the above leads towards meeting the requirements of the globalized world. Such a world increasingly wishes to obliterate the need and the importance of local contexts, local knowledge and local solutions. Context specificity is paid only a lip service in this content driven world.

The world of education is only a sub-system in this entire global trend, and has thus, not remained untouched by this quest for standardization. The imperial forces that ruled over India for close to two centuries developed the basic framework for the Indian education system, from which we have not much deviated since and even after independence. What constitutes education and what should be taught in our schools, colleges and universities is decided by the political leaders, bureaucrats and the educational experts (the role of the third category of individuals varying with the political dispensation in power). The role of students, teachers and parents in this whole process is minimal. It is only incidental that these are the three constituencies that are most effected by even the smallest of the decisions taken by the first three groups of people. This is the standardized process that is in fact followed globally (in majority of the nations at least), irrespective of whether a nation is a democracy or not, in fact more so in avowed democracies. A democracy, at least purportedly, is all about the voice of the people, however, in actual practice it has been definitively concluded that ‘common people’ are not worth giving a voice to.

In such systems, completely devoid of context specificity and local influences, the needs of an individual do-not find any space in the ‘bigger’ scheme of things. In this context, the individual is forced to adapt to the system rather than the system tailoring itself to the needs of the individual.

Keeping all of the above in mind, the latest intent of the Indian government to scrap the ‘No detention policy’ introduced by the Right to Education Act, 2009, doesn’t come as a surprise. Any act promulgated for the whole of a nation, that too as diverse as the Indian nation, can at best provide only the broadest of framework and guidelines, to be sufficiently tweaked to suit the local conditions. However, this is seldom what actually happens. The lure of standardization is too strong to be easily swept aside. So, readymade frameworks, formulae and solutions are cherry-picked from one context and blindly implemented in a completely different one.

In the extant case, the results of standardized evaluation techniques used to evaluate a child, irrespective of any other contextual consideration, convinced the policy makers and the implementers alike, that the ‘No detention policy’ had in fact turned out to be an abysmal failure. Again succumbing to the temptation of simplifying the problem, and as a consequence simplifying the solution as well, it was definitively concluded that scrapping the ‘No detention policy’ would solve all the problems ailing our education system. The policy may well be scrapped in the coming session of the Parliament. However, in the above pandemonium, we might have just succeeded in compounding the problem.

The basic problem with the ‘standardized’ world today is that it has long forgotten the fundamentals of problem solving. Each and every problem that faces an individual or a society as a whole, is unique in itself, and thus has a unique solution. It cannot be solved by ready-made, standardized, copy and paste methods. The very first step of this process is forming the problem statement correctly. The next step is breaking down and internalizing the problem statement to such an extent that the possible solutions become visible in the problem statement itself. Then comes the cumbersome but equally significant task of data collection, followed by hypothesizing, testing of the hypothesis, its validation, the listing of possible solutions, and implementation of the one thought of as the most appropriate. However, even this remains forever open to the rigor of testing, and the possibility of being falsified in light of better research. In this entire process, the context of the problem needs to be always kept in mind. The second thing that needs to be severely guarded against is the prejudices and biases of the problem solver that may creep in at any time and place.

On the road from a problem to a solution, simplification is an inevitable pit stop, without which, a solution possibly cannot be arrived at. However, the nature of simplification that one attempts, together with its consequences, needs to be problematized. In some cases and at some places, short-cuts may work, but the mainstreaming of ‘short-cut societies’ is, I think, the biggest challenge that faces our world today.

Deconstructing the “Education – Industry interface”

With the instrumental value of education acquiring center-stage in today’s world, it is being increasingly and more and more vociferously argued that forging and fostering strong education-industry linkages is the need of the hour. Two reports that I read in the Indian Express (http://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/digitisation-partnership-of-ideas-4951582/) and (http://indianexpress.com/article/business/companies/bharti-airtel-foundation-artificial-intelligence-4952074/), encouraged me to articulate my thoughts on this growing trend, which is generally portrayed and perceived to be an extremely positive one. However, I wish to disagree with this dominant view, and also wish to place my disagreement, along with the reasons for the same, on record.

In the first of these reports, the author is arguing for harnessing the opportunity provided by digitization to strengthen the ties between industry and academia. This caters to the dominant narrative about the education system today, which views it as a means for securing decent and well-paying jobs, as far as individuals are concerned, and a means to move forward on its defined agenda of ‘growth and development’, as far as society is concerned. The second article which I have referred to above, if looked at with a critical lens, clearly delineates the extent to which the dominant narrative, of the need of education to align itself with the trends in industry, has established itself in the public psyche. The largesse being offered by a big technology giant for opening a University in India, with a special focus on artificial intelligence, robotics, virtual reality and the internet of things, with the added promise of providing this education free of cost to the children from poor communities, is being portrayed as addressing two challenges at the same time, one that of the woeful state of the present education system, and second that of threat of innovation, by embracing it upfront.

In the above mentioned narrative, however, many things have been left unsaid. Firstly, the altruistic motives of the technology giant, in open and complete display here, may be in need of further examination. The motive of industry or a ‘for-profit’ organization, when it indulges in philanthropy also, need to be subject to examination. The first and foremost motive of the industrial and technological world is to ensure its own growth and development. This, of course, is as per the natural order of things. The industry-technology lobby will thus always push for the alignment of educational goals with its own goals. In keeping with this, Bharti Airtel, while announcing its huge philanthropic effort, also made it clear that the focus would be on development of future technology. When I argue, therefore, for deconstructing the above narrative, I am not coming from an anti-industry, anti-technology mindset. However, what I want to emphasize is that the slogan should be “Technology for Education” rather than “Education for Technology”. By this what I mean is that the growth and development in technology should aid and assist in furthering the goals of education rather than adapting the education system to fit the needs of industry and technology. This definitive shift towards completely instrumental goals of education is deeply problematic.

Secondly, the manner of presentation of such philanthropic efforts permanently casts the targets of this largesse in the frame of passive receivers, devoid of any agency, to be pitied upon and rescued from the abysmal conditions they are in. Such a frame of reference is forever defined in terms of “large-hearted rich vs needy poor”, “decision-makers vs meek followers”, so on and so forth. There is an inherent problem in such kind of a world where the poor and their poverty need to be put on a perpetual showcase, so that the rich are able to justify their wealth.

Thirdly, by not questioning and critically examining the narrative of the industry leaders, and their constant demands for establishing industry-academia linkages, a tacit support is being rendered to such a narrative, and as time passes, a situation might arise where it will then become impossible to question this narrative at all. This has already happened in case of ‘capitalism’ having established itself as the only currently operative and possibly operative ideology in the future as well, throughout the world. Any alternatives, even if mentioned, are sidelined and hardly taken seriously.

Lastly, I think it is imperative that education and learning is rescued from the hold of instrumentalism, as soon as possible. The survival of this world and this earth crucially hinges on this. The loss of social, environmental and humanitarian perspectives from human lives, is leading the world on a fast track road towards destruction. The sooner this is realized, the better it shall be, for all mankind.

 

36 years apart: Two deaths, one in matter, the other in spirit

6^th December 1956: B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution of India, leaves this world, albeit, physically.

6^th December, 1992: B.R. Ambedkar, the architect of the Constitution of India, leaves this world, this time, in spirit.

36 years separate the two incidents, both of which can be said to be among the landmark moments in the history of India. 6^th December, every year, marks the anniversary of both of them. While on the one hand, it commemorates the death anniversary of the one who nurtured to life the Constitution that is the fountainhead of this nation, on the other hand, it also commemorates another death anniversary, of the spirit of the very same Constitution.

The struggle that defined the life of B.R. Ambedkar was his struggle against the most depraved institution of the Hindu religion, the caste system. Born in the so-called ‘low-caste’, he lived the reality of extreme caste discrimination, right from his childhood. Despite all odds though, he succeeded in educating himself and in growing up to be a man of an independent mind, a rational and critical thinker. Throughout his life, he waged a continuous struggle against the institution of caste entrenched in the Hindu religion, so much so that a few months prior to his death, he decided to disown the religion of his birth and converted to Buddhism, the religion of his choice, in the process, taking along millions of his fellow-sufferers who had been at the receiving end of this atrocious practice.

The fundamental principle that lies at the foundation of the caste system is the principle of exclusion. It is so defined as to exclude certain people from being treated as equal human beings to the rest, based solely on the accident of their birth. This very same principle of exclusion is also the one that drove the Babri Masjid demolition, the anniversary of which also happens to fall on 6^th December.

Exclusion may take any form and may be practiced on any basis, be it caste, religion, region, gender or any such force that seeks to discriminate against one human being, in favor of the other, solely based on the characteristics defined by birth. The Babri Masjid demolition of 1992 was a fructification of the idea of exclusion based on religion. It was an act that sought to establish the supremacy of Hindus in India. It was an act that sought to exclude Muslims from the idea of India that B.R. Ambedkar had sought to establish irrevocably through the Constitution of India.

And so, after experiencing the death of the man as well as his idea of India, this nation was made to experience a peculiarly interesting commemoration on the occasion of death anniversary of both, on 6^th December, 2017. Quite interestingly, the very same people who have been watching over an entire nation being torn apart by the idea of exclusion that B.R. Ambedkar spent his entire lifetime fighting against, were seen paying him their ‘heartfelt’ respect and homage. The very same people, who have been the torchbearers of the very idea of Hinduism that he fought tooth and nail against, were seen co-opting the man, without the slightest of compunctions.

The most interesting part of this entire experience, though, was that it failed to elicit a cry of disbelief from the very nation that was thus being so openly and blatantly deceived. Such is the irony of the times that we are living in.  

Labelling Theory and the Classrooms

Labelling Theory was primarily developed through the work of sociologists in the decades of 1960s, mostly in the context of classification of certain behaviors as deviant from socially acceptable norms. This theory basically posits that self-identity and behavior of individuals may be influenced by the terms used to describe them or by the ‘labels’ the society chooses to attach to them. This theory gained traction in the decades of 1960s and 1970s. Sociologists like Emile Durkheim, George Herbert Mead, Howard Becker, Edwin Lemert etc., variously referred to it and used it in different contexts and in the process, also developed upon it.

This theory is also closely related to the concept of self-fulfilling prophecy. This expression was coined by the sociologist Robert. K. Merton. In simple terms, it means the following: Certain professed expectations (positive or negative), may affect behavior so much so that the expectations actually come true.

Although the abovementioned theories have been invoked in various contexts, I would like to talk about these in the classroom context, by the means of an example. The incident that I am now going to discuss is an actual classroom experience that occurred in the Nursery class of a reputed private school that prides itself on being an innovative and progressive school.

The said school uses storytelling as a major learning resource for the pre-primary students. The school planned on holding a story-telling session in front of an audience, in this case, the parents of these 3-4 year olds. A story which was transacted often with the kids in the classroom was chosen to be enacted in front of the parents. This was the first time that such a ‘show’ had been envisaged by the school. For the show, the class-teacher of the kids selected 2-3 students who would be given the roles which had certain dialogues to be spoken. The rest of the students were supposed to be holding certain props like trees etc. and standing on the stage with these props. The selection of the students who were required to be delivering the dialogues was done by the teacher based on her judgment on who would be able to memorize the dialogues and deliver them confidently on the stage. In fact she called the parents of the few she had initially chosen separately and asked them to make the children practice the dialogues at home as well. However, mid-way she decided to change the students (without informing the parents and for undisclosed reasons), and selected some other students for the roles with dialogues. On the day of the ‘show’, the teacher began by mentioning in her speech how each and every student was participating in various capacities. She added that the dialogues had been given to those who were more self-confident on stage. The 5-7 minute show thus completed uneventfully, and very ‘successfully’ according to the school and many parents.

This entire incident above, sounds pretty innocuous and commonplace and many of you would be wondering what I am actually trying to convey here. Imagine a bunch of 3-4 year old kids. At this age, children are dominated by a curious spirit, wanting to explore things, play and run around. They are at their inquisitive and playful best. In their journey of exploration, storytelling is indeed a very powerful means of nurturing and developing their inherent abilities. However, when the same tool is used as a means of showcasing the development of children by putting them up on a display as above, the entire purpose is itself defeated. These children, who have been growing and developing beautifully as a group are now classified into groups, some who are more self-confident and are thus chosen to play the parts with dialogues, and the rest who may not be thought that suitable for these roles. They are thus introduced to the process of ‘labelling’ that they will have to undergo throughout, beginning this very day. At this young age, they might not understand any of it and may just follow their teacher blindly. Yet, as they grow, they will slowly begin to internalize the expectations of the teacher and her perception of their own selves. Self-fulfilling prophecy may then kick into play, and the inherent unique strengths and capabilities of the children may be pushed into the background and much worse, may die a natural death.

What are the learning goals that were fulfilled for the children after this ‘show’ was ‘successfully’ conducted? A few of them developed their skills of rote memorization, whether or not they actually understood what they were speaking is another question. The rest of them had a great time enjoying themselves in their own little ways (they were innocently playing with each other and chatting among themselves) even while standing on the stage with props in hand. That it can be concluded from the above that those who were chosen for narrating the dialogues were necessarily more capable of doing it is highly doubtful. Also, the teacher (who narrated most of the story herself) got to showcase her ‘achievements’ with the kids to the entire group of parents. Are these the goals that should be sought to be fulfilled? This is a moot question indeed.

A story-telling session, conducted as a part of the natural routine of students, where they are not tied down by being forced to ‘perform’ for an audience, is an immensely powerful learning tool. During such sessions, children listen, ask questions, develop an understanding of the language, enhance their vocabulary and can also be made to understand various deep concepts in a fun way. In fact, some systems of education, like the Waldorf system, emphasize greatly on the use of such tools.

(Waldorf system is based on the educational philosophy propounded by Rudolf Steiner. This system emphasizes on the holistic development of children weaving together, arts, crafts, manual activities, storytelling etc. in the classroom experience, especially in the elementary stages. The early childhood education, in this system, emphasizes on hands-on activities and creative play, the elementary education emphasizes on developing artistic expressions and social capacities and the secondary education focusses on critical reasoning and empathetic understanding. In the kindergarten stage, storytelling is one of the many powerful tools used in this system. Story-telling sessions are part of the daily classroom routine for the kindergarten kids. The love of language and learning is built into the children through these daily animated sessions which also harness the creative energies of children. A key aspect of this system is its non-competitive nature, focusing instead on harnessing the capabilities and inherent strengths of each and every child.)

The classroom is like a second home for the child. Each and every child requires to be nurtured with unadulterated care and love to be able to realize her complete potential. For this, it is essential to harness the inherent strengths and unique abilities of each and every child. Classifying them, labelling them, ranking them may have their limited uses (more so for the schools than the children), however, if the goal is to ensure that the every seed planted blossoms into a beautiful flower, then the practices followed inside the classrooms will need a serious rethink.

 

Welcome to ‘New India’

Wish you a very happy independence day!

On a new journey…towards a ‘New India’, we are being ably led, being guided all the way

This ‘New India’ will be something like we have never seen before

Or is it that we have been seeing it so often that our eyes have now dulled and turned sour?

 

They say that truth emerges out of deep and constant churning of a lie

And that pain needs to be inflicted to a point of numbness….only then does it succeed in suppressing and stifling a cry

In the ‘New India’ that we are being led into on this day

All confusion shall be cleared, we shall be cured of all the silly thoughts that play havoc with our minds and make us lose our way

 

We keeping on harping upon our freedom of thought speech and expression

Without ever understanding its real import, instead interpreting it in any random fashion

On entering the ‘New India’, for the first time we shall understand

The real meaning of freedom, the actual interpretation that would now be the law of the land

 

Freedom of thought was never meant to mean that we shall be entitled to our thoughts

That we could not be incarcerated to hold on to our views, no matter what;

It very clearly meant the freedom from the very process of having to think

We were free from the huge burden that ‘thinking’ was forcing us to shoulder, we were free birds now; free to rejoice in our new found freedom, everything had changed in a blink

 

We had all along actually been misinterpreting the freedom

The real meaning had only now been revealed, all along, some insidious forces had succeeded in keeping it hidden

Now that it was clear that what we enjoyed was the ‘freedom from thinking’

Anyone who dared to hold any independent thought would be automatically doomed from the very beginning

 

Now that the rules of the ‘New India’ are suitably clear to you

Don’t cry foul tomorrow when your thoughts are policed and held up against you

For you were the ones who had wanted this freedom all along

This ‘New India’ is the culmination of all your dreams and struggles of the innumerable years all gone

The Faltering Humanity

They had neither coveted for the stars nor for the moon,

At most, they would have just wished to regain their health soon.

So that they could get back to the ‘normal’; be that normal be exciting or mundane,

At least it was better than lying sick in a room, experiencing all this pain.

 

They didn’t think what they were wishing was something very special,

For they had been falling sick and getting well umpteen number of times, it was all very casual.

 

They were mere kids….eager to grow up…to form a part of the world of adults,

For the adults had seemed to them all-knowing and knowledgeable, whose world rarely had time for all their fuss.

They did want to grow up, because they would also then gain legitimacy,

Their thoughts and words would then have a meaning…. Right now they were only kids who rattled and prattled with annoying frequency.

 

The adults had thought of them as mere fools unaware of real serious things in life,

They had gleefully kept up the facade; after all, their future lives would anyway have their usual share of strife.

 

But in the safe haven of their hearts,

They had harbored numerous dreams and thoughts.

Some of them wanting to lead ordinary routine lives, as their parents were doing,

Earn their living, take care of their families, such responsible roles they were for themselves envisaging.

Some others had some special ambitions hidden in their hearts,

Of touching the skies, becoming this and that, having their names written in history, before this world they depart.

 

Lying in that hospital room that day, restless to be cured and out of there soon,

Some would be sleeping, some awake, some already thinking what they would do when they were out of this gloom.

Oblivious were they of the developments in the adult world,

Naïve in their belief that hospital was a place where one went to get cured.

How could they think otherwise? This is what they had always been told,

They had read it in books, heard it from their teachers, their parents, who had them completely to this idea sold.

 

Although not completely understanding the adult language when they spoke big words like duties and rights,

Still they knew this much that if they were born, they had the right to breathe, no one in their sane mind could deny it to them, try how much ever they might.

 

What did they know, how naïve were they,

How grossly they had underestimated the adult world, which was much more capable of turning everything into ‘child’s play’.

 

Capable of conveniently forgetting its duties,

The duties for which someone was being paid by the day.

Capable of murder of innocent little children,

And calling it by innumerable other names, so that its deeds could remain hidden.

Capable of trivializing and politicizing almost everything under the sun,

Because humanity and tenets fundamental to human existence were increasingly on the run.

 

Into the permanent state of silence though they have now been forced to enter,

This deafening silence will continue to haunt us forever.

For there is no place to run from one’s conscience,

No place that will be able to provide, even for a second, any shelter.