Movies: Wonderland versus Reality

It seems that the days when Bollywood movies used to be harbingers of fantasy are coming to an end. The burgeoning middle class, which has been made economically stronger by the fruits of the Liberalization-Globalization-Privatization (LPG) era, seems to be developing an appetite for movies that project reality. The "silver screen" isn't expected to portray demi-gods and demi-goddesses romantically dancing around trees and in grasslands anymore. If there is an element of entertainment in the movies, it has to be invariably interlaced with information—to give rise to "infotainment".

Movies and Reality

The current climate in the Indian movies seems to be veering towards a projection of the hard facts of the society. Take the case of the movie 'Oh My God'. The movie brilliantly conveyed to the audience how certain sections of the society indulge in commodification of religion, spiritual beliefs, talismans and in propagation of idolatry by deifying material objects to serve their own vested interests. It is no wonder that the movie had drawn sharp criticism from the intolerant sections of our country—sections that consider it their birth-right to get offended at every possible work of art, even if the bona fide intent of the work is to bring positive social reform.

Another positive role played by the movies has been to portray systemic failures, i.e., failure, for various reasons, in the working of the institutions of the State. The movies Khakee, Yahaan, Shaurya are some of the stalwarts in this area. Then, the movie Swades had tried to bring out the development deficit in the rural areas of India and had tried to link it with the phenomenon of "brain drain". It is a pity that though such movies receive huge critical acclaim, they do not perform so well at the box-office! Movies have an educational role too. They try to enliven in the memories of the people important historical events, e.g., Richard Attenborough's English movie Gandhi. Movies try to spread awareness about art and culture; they also help in the promotion of tourism.

The ushering of a "new age" in the movies has seen various filmmakers (actors and producers), prominent among them being Anurag Kashyap, Prakash Jha, Shoojit Sircar, Farhan Akhtar, trying to rope in new themes for their creations. Farhan Akhtar displayed this in the movie Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara, in which he tried to portray the need of Work-Life Balance and the negatives of an excessive desire for materialistic success. In the movie Chakravyuh, Prakash Jha tried to bring out a fictionalized story set in the backdrop of Left-Wing Extremism, which has (in the words of former Prime Minister Manmohan Singh) emerged as the biggest internal security challenge to India. Shoojit Sircar tried to bring out the fictionalized versions of terrorism in Jammu & Kashmir in his movie Yahaan and the Indian intelligence operations in the civil war between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in his movie Madras Cafe. He also subtly-yet-boldly projected the theme of sperm donation and related societal mindsets in his movie Vicky Donor. Then, filmmakers have also tried to bring widespread popularity to sportspersons through their movies—Milkha Singh ("Flying Sikh") in Bhaag Milkha Bhaag and MC Mary Kom in the movie Mary Kom.

Movies on a different pedestal?

Why are movies treated at a different pedestal when it comes to setting the standards for their content? The main reason seems to be the widespread grasp of movies on the minds of the people as compared to other forms of mass media. This is, perhaps, because of the combined effect of the literary content and dialogue delivery interlaced with background score and powerful visuals. Also, watching a movie doesn't require reading skills (necessary for print media), access to television sets (necessary for electronic media) or access to smartphones/computers (necessary for social media). Thus, it is no wonder that movies seem to grab the headlines much before they are released—when they apply for a certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). What is a cause of concern, though, is the fine line between censorship and editorship. Many-a-time (e.g., in the recent case of CBFC Chairman Pahlaj Nihalani's issuance of a list of "cuss words" that were to be prohibited to be used in movies and the subsequent withdrawal of the list after it was vociferously objected to by various filmmakers as an attempt to bring in totalitarianism by stifling creative freedom), this fine line has been disregarded. Another scenario is when certain state governments issue diktats to ban the screening of a particular movie on the pretext that it may otherwise inflame public sentiment and may thus create law and order problems. A case in point is that of the English movie Dam 999 whose screening was banned by Tamil Nadu government. The movie was perceived to be loosely based on the issue of the Mullaperiyar Dam, a contentious issue between Tamil Nadu and Kerala.

The 'star' culture

A noteworthy phenomenon of the Indian movies has been the creation of "celebrity-culture" or a "star-culture". The audience, especially the people belonging to the lower social-economic strata and the youth, elevate the actors to the level of demi-gods and demi-goddesses. This is further compounded by the other forms of mass media, whose journalists and the paparazzi clamour and fight hard to capture every small event of the actors' lives. Important airtime of the electronic media may be devoted to the changed hairstyles of the "celebrities" even at the cost of social issues such as poverty and hunger, because such "trivial issues" do not seem to generate enough Television Rating Points (TRPs) for the news channels. Sometimes, this hunger for celebrity news assumes the proportion of encroachment upon the private lives of these "stars". Some of the best examples in this category are those of the late M.G. Ramachandran ("MGR"), the late N.T. Rama Rao ("NTR") and Rajinikanth (born Shivaji Rao Gaekwad).

Movie celebrities are paid to perform or are present as chief guests at various functions organized by corporate entities and state governments, and even at private functions of politicians and wealthy individuals of the corporate world. They are also employed by various national and multinational companies as 'brand endorsers' (a phenomenon that cannot be overlooked due to the necessity of advertising and 'marketing' in the market economy). An observation, that I recently made in this regard, is of movie actors endorsing 'pan masala' products. Perhaps the companies, which hitherto used to make chewing tobacco and snuff, have been so remorseful after being chided by various Supreme Court and High Court judgments for gifting leukoplakia (precancerous white-coloured lesions in the mouth) and oral, esophageal, pancreatic cancers to the people of India that they have resorted to the employment of movie "stars" as brand-endorsers of pan masala, etc., to bring home the point to Indians that they need to freshen-up their mouths by savouring new attractively-packaged aromatic vitriolic products. What is funny is that I remember one of these very actors uttering in a dialogue in some movie that film "stars" who endorse some products in television commercials do not even sniff those products in real life!

"With Great Power comes Great Responsibility"

Given the large level of trust that is placed on the movie actors, who are treated as idols, there should be a sense of responsibility among the film actors towards the society. I quote a dialogue from the movie 'Lakshya' (even though taken out of context)—"...ye vishwaas bahut badi izzat hai aur bahut badi zimmedaari bhi"—this belief is a large honour as well as a large responsibility. Some of the positive work done by movie actors are the social initiative 'Men Against Rape and Discrimination' (MARD) by Farhan Akhtar and the positive work done by Celina Jaitley for the rights of the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transgender (LGBT) community, to mention a few.

But then, there are bad apples too. Salman Khan's positive initiatives through his NGO 'Being Human' may be grounds for, at the maximum, getting a remission of his prison sentence for crushing pavement dwellers under the wheels of his Sports Utility Vehicle. But his positive work carried out later does not absolve him of all the guilt. And then there was another "celebrity" singer Abhijeet Bhattacharya who compared pavement dwellers with dogs in his tweet; luckily for him, he apologized for his irresponsible comments. Sadly, wealthy actors rope in rich lawyers to bail them out of jail even as a large number of undertrials languish in the Indian prisons, sometimes for time periods crossing even the maximum sentence proscribed under law for the crime for which they were accused.

Another issue to be considered is the one of brand endorsements by celebrities, especially after the current nationwide ban on Nestle Maggi by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI). Movie actors do have every right to endorse products as this fundamental right is covered under the Article 19 of the Constitution of India—freedom of speech and expression (for commercial purposes) and well as freedom of occupation (because the endorsement provides them with earnings). While it may be argued that the brand endorsers of the product couldn't have possibly known about the nutritional value of the product given that it is a thing of technical nature, that the product had already been cleared as safe by the food regulators, and that the actors cannot (in any manner) be held accountable for mens rea or for having mala fide intentions, there certainly has to be some degree of accountability. This is because the endorsers have a hegemonic stronghold on the minds of the vulnerable sections of the consumers. If movie actors are qualified to be awarded with Padma awards for excellence in their fields as well as for benefiting the society by their acts, they should be accountable to the society for an endorsed product that has been found unsuitable, more so if it is a food product. The least they could do is to issue public statements to forbid people from using any product if it is found unfit for use and to express that they had endorsed the product when they had no knowledge of any harm caused by it.

Then, there should be a certain dignified conduct by actors. There was widespread condemnation of the performance of Madhuri Dixit, Salman Khan, etc., on the concluding day of the Saifai Mahotsav in Uttar Pradesh (U.P.) even as many victims of the Muzaffarnagar Riots were suffering in makeshift camps and weren't even fully rehabilitated. While the "celebrities" might have promoted tourism and culture in the eyes of the U.P. state government, the function was widely criticized by various quarters among the civil society and the political parties for the huge fanfare amidst penury of the communal riot victims.

To conclude, it can be said that though the paparazzi shouldn't encroach upon the lives of the movie actors, the movie actors too must realize their responsibility towards the same society that has aggrandized them to the level of "stars" of the "silver screen".

Nostalgia

Sometimes, a seemingly unfortunate occurrence may later on lead to an experience that ends on an entirely different positive note. Losing my Driving Licence, which I had kept in a [now stolen] wallet, gave me a reason compelling enough to re-visit the place where I had spent the foundational years of my life (because my licence was issued by the Regional Transport Office lying in the district under which the aforementioned place falls).

Srinagar Garhwal (henceforth referred to as Srinagar) used to be (when I was a child) a small town located in the Garhwal Commissionary of the hill state Uttarakhand (carved out of Uttar Pradesh state on 9 November 2000) in India. Historically, it used to be the Capital of the Garhwal Kingdom till 1804 AD. This was after the king Ajay Pal shifted his capital from Chamoli (the erstwhile Chandpurgarhi) to this place. At present, this place is the largest city (though its expanse is nowhere when compared to that of the cities in the plains of India) in the Garhwal hills. Srinagar is accessible from Dehradun, the capital of Uttarakhand, by road; the distance is about 150 km. The city has a Municipality and administratively, it is a tehsil under the Pauri Garhwal district. The city is home to Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna (HNB) Garhwal University, Government Medical College (Srikot), [presently] National Institute of Technology (Sumari) and the Sashastra Seema Bal (SSB) Officers' Training Academy. Situated on the left bank of the river Alaknanda (which is the largest tributary—in terms of water content—of the river Ganga), Srinagar is situated at an average elevation of 560 m above mean sea level. Contrary to the popular perception, the situation of Srinagar as a hill city doesn't reward it with an affable climate. It sees extremes of temperatures—hot summers and cold winters.

As I neared the police check-post at Srinagar Garhwal on 5 May 2015 (after a gap of almost 4 years) I realized that everything has changed in Srinagar, yet nothing has changed. The city had to bear the brunt of the 2013 Uttarakhand deluge. The river Alaknanda in all its fury submerged the buildings near the banks under enormous amount of debris. Yet today, except for some visible signs of the destruction in the areas near the banks, most of the city seems to have stood resilient in the face of adversity (even though I have been one among the 'locals' of Srinagar for a long time, this account can be considered to be of a 'local tourist' because I had stayed there for just two nights during my sojourn). However, I certify that despite having stayed there for a very brief period, I enjoyed undisturbed-untroubled sleep during the nights. Despite all the hardships that the people of the hills have to face, most of the the hill folks are innately unassuming (although, of late, materialist influences have started to make their foray in this city—all thanks to the revenue generated by the tourism industry during the 'Char Dham Yatra' and the 'Hemkund Sahib Yatra' as also the influx of the mining mafia in the hills). I felt inner solace when I met my old neighbours as well as an old classmate, almost all of who couldn't recognize me in the first instance and cited the reason that I have changed a lot during the passage of the intervening years.

I would like to take a short detour. Even as many of my fellow Indians were busy expressing solidarity with Salman Khan when he was convicted by a sessions court and awarded a 5-year rigorous imprisonment for drunk-driving and trampling pavement-dwellers, I felt much better off by switching-off the television (which I anyway seldom watch) and then enjoying the beauty of the Garhwal hills. Perhaps Mr Khan realized what it is being human [as the accusations against him go] after having hunted chinkaras and black-bucks in 1998 and trampling humans in 2002. As for Mr Abhijeet Bhattacharya, even though you have apologized in public (and it's good that you have done so), let me re-iterate that your tweets were simply unacceptable. To hell with what you did when you had no work, pavement-dwellers are not dogs; you may have intentioned to support a fellow Bollywood personality who runs an NGO by the name "Being Human" but 'being human' includes conferring a compassionate treatment even on animals (and not trampling them under the wheels of your vehicle).

I have uploaded some photographs which I had clicked during my sojourn at Srinagar Garhwal. Some people opine that a picture is worth a thousand words. I hope that the following pictures are able to present glimpses of what I would like to refer to as my 'personal paradise'. I say—"Kuchh din to guzaaro mere Srinagar Garhwal mein" (please spend some days in my Srinagar Garhwal).

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village

Trek Route from 'Aithana' ('ऐठाणा') village to Ashthavakra ('अष्ठावक्र') temple; trekking along this path in the morning brought back memories of school days when I used to go for this trek alongwith some of my classmates

Pine trees or Pinus roxburghii ('चीड़'); as per one story, these were introduced to Uttarakhand hills by the British who wanted to exploit them for their commercial value; due to the high resin content in their wood, they are used as firewood and their 'needles' almost form a near-ubiquitous carpet on the hills because of which the hills become highly prone to forest fires (दावानल)

Natural Carpet formed by the 'needles' of Pine trees

Female Cone of Pine tree

Alas! Excessive human intervention is turning out to be bad for the hills. Is this what 'Being Human' is?

A part of Srinagar Garhwal (photograph captured from an elevated spot on a hill)

Blue Jacaranda or Jacaranda mimosifolia (the violet-flowered tree)

We Love Cricket!

We love cricket, don't we? After all, isn't that what gives India the feeling of being a nation? Despite having a myriad of religions, Indians have a common religion—cricket. Cricket is so much in our blood that the Government of India had practised even "cricket diplomacy" to improve Indo- Pak relations. And why shouldn't we love cricket? The "gentlemen's game" is indeed one of the precious legacies left to us by the colonial rulers.

We love cricket. Cricket is so important that we cannot keep ourselves from sharing even split-second occurrences of what goes on and outside that sacred 22-yard distance and of what goes on in the lives of cricketers on and off the field. After we lose 'very important' cricket matches, some of us vent our ire on certain cricketers and their personal lives, and some others express our solidarity with them in their 'moments of crisis'. We get emotional and enthusiastic, we scream on the top of our voices, we give expert advice to cricketers on how to play and how not to play—after all, we can't afford to show laxity given that we are dealing with the pan-Indian religion. We "bleed blue" and we almost overlook those who bleed to death. On 26 March 2015, social media was replete with pictures, videos and messages about the Indian cricket team because we had lost a world cup semi-final match to Australia. And this was a very important event, wasn't it? The electronic media chose to highlight this, given the fact that electronic media houses can't afford to overlook it. And why not? Overlooking it would certainly be inimical to their business interests. The same day, the news of a Dornier-228 of the Navy crashing off the Coast of Goa (even when it was an event that happened on 24 March 2015) could scarcely make its presence felt in the electronic media; the print media seemed to be much more concerned than its electronic counterpart about the Indian Navy personnel involved in the crash. There were very rare instances of people forwarding this news through Instant Messaging applications or through social media websites. Two young officers in their 20s—Lieutenant Kiran Shekhawat and Sub-Lieutenant Abhinav Nagori—lost their lives in watery graves. But should we have bothered about it? They bled to death in the course of their job, while the Indian cricket team had gone to perform a 'national duty'.

We love cricket. We do not use social media, not even in the form of one-liners, to spread awareness about the death of the cragsman Malli Mastan Babu even when he used to unfurl the Indian flag on the summits that he scaled. His being an alumnus of some of the most prestigious educational institutions of the country even when he had been from an economically-underprivileged background isn't a qualification good enough to make a social media presence felt posthumously; understandable it is, because he wasn't connected with cricket.

We love cricket. We don't mind expelling some university students if they felt like supporting the Pakistani cricket team. After all, such an act would be an insult to the integrity of India, wouldn't it? We deify cricketers. We post photoshopped images on the social media—images that show Maria Sharapova genuflecting in front of Sachin Tendulkar because she had earlier expressed ignorance about the "God of Cricket". Why shouldn't we? Ignorance about the God of Cricket is tantamount to ignorance about the God of the pan-Indian religion.

We love cricket. It is apt that when the Government of India decides to bestow the Bharat Ratna—the highest civilian honour—upon a sportsperson, it should inadvertently be on a cricketer.

In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Marcus Antonius had repeatedly used the phrase "honourable men" to convey something to the "friends, Romans, countrymen". I hope that my erudite readers will be quick to establish a relation between my resort to the sentence "We love cricket" and a usage of the aforementioned phrase in Julius Caesar.

LETTER to SADNESS (upon HER DEATH)

Dear SADNESS,

I came to know about your painful death a day ago. It is a different thing, though, that I would not have allowed you to enter my door. You had tried your level best to demolish my sense of self and engulf me in your arms. You did this by trying to trace the footsteps of your father, FAILURE, who entered my home as a guest just two days back.

I believe it is my duty to inform you posthumously that you had lost your way when you tried to enter my door. You fell into the moat created by my strong conviction and by the moral support my well-wishers have rendered to me. You were unaware that your father has been a very dear friend of mine; I learn more from him than from anyone else.

I consider it my duty to inform you posthumously that I got to hear some of the most encouraging statements from my well-wishers after your father entered my home as a guest. They have told me that irrespective of the position I hold in life, irrespective of my professional standing, they will always have faith in me. Even if I am not able to maintain regular communication links with them owing to the exigencies of the pursuit of my current endeavour, they believe in what I do and stand by me.

I know it is my duty to inform you posthumously that I have bettered as a human being, as the years passed by, while pursuing my goal of self-actualization. Your father hasn't killed me; he has made me stronger. He has made my value known to a large number of people in life; many of the seemingly successful people cannot claim to have amassed such an enormous human capital during all this while. I have truly witnessed my Idea of India, given that people from all corners of India (and some even residing overseas), people used to working in diverse work environments, and people belonging to diverse social and economic backgrounds, have expressed solidarity with me. I wish to tell you—your father has felt proud that he visited my home. I also know that I can rightfully claim to have achieved a level of personal development many others can only dream to achieve. Even though my efforts may not seem to have achieved the desired outcome yet, they have prepared an intense groundwork of roots (in just the same way as the roots of bamboo) for me to stand upon; they have strengthened my foundation.

While I wish (keeping in my mind the norms of common courteous conduct) that your soul may rest in peace, I unabashedly tell you that your presence will not be tolerated by me. Your soul may not resuscitate itself because my well-wishers believe in me and I believe in myself. My suggestion to you is to not disguise yourself and to not re-enter my home upon your re-birth, as the shock of another defeat may not be bearable for you.

Yours never,

Vitthal

Where is my "Ocean of Opportunities"?

Dear Primus inter pares,

I write to you to draw your attention towards my plight—the plight of an anonymous soldier. If you want to know my identity, I am anyone among those numerous guardians of the Indian territorial boundaries, who are entrusted with 'securing the Indian borders'.

Whenever I don the drab, I am hailed by the Army media campaigns through the words 'jeena to aise jeena' (life should be lived like this); when I put on the pristine blues, the Air Force declares that I 'touch the sky with glory'; when I wear the whites, the Navy avers that 'I have an ocean of opportunities'. What happens when an unfortunate accident cuts short my life and my aspirations? The political class clamours to issue brief and eloquent statements praising my bravery for having made the 'supreme sacrifice'. My national-flag-draped coffin earns gun salutes, medals and scrolls are conferred upon me posthumously and a road or a school or a petrol pump is named after me. I understand that insurance money and other such consolatory mechanisms cannot compensate for the loss of a human life, and yet, it is expedient in the name of economic efficiency to put a monetary value on a soldier's life. But what then? What after the flames on my pyre die down in the memories of the people? Life goes on, and everybody moves on. I wouldn't have wanted it to come to a standstill, but shouldn't there be an effort by the political class to reduce such tragedies?

When I applied to join the defence forces, I understood that there was a risk involved. Yet, my desire to get a respectable career got the better of my fears. While I was alive, I had spent precious moments with my course-mates in the services. We had been through thick-and-thin, and I witnessed a level of camaraderie that I might not have expected, had I been a civilian. After I've passed away, they do not have a recourse if they want to re-live those moments. In the call of duty, I took bullets to my chest, I flew in coffins in the skies, I met watery graves. Yet, the political dispensation seemed to act at a snail's pace in the areas in which it was required to act. When I say this, I refer to the delayed defence acquisitions and technology transfers, ageing fleet of ships and reducing squadrons. I ask of you: who is responsible for stifling me? Should I take to task the bureaucratic red-tape for throttling my trachea? Or should I ascribe this to a paralysis of political will? When the 5-year term of a Lok Sabha M.P. gets over, all that (s)he loses is a parliamentary seat and the parliamentary privileges attached to it. The taxpayer loses a lot of money which had been incurred on procuring defence equipment and on the training imparted to me for protecting him. The nation-state loses, perhaps, a human resource. I LOSE MY LIFE while guarding the Westphalian borders.

The Air Force Act, 1950, the Army Act, 1950, and the Navy Act, 1957, lay down that my freedom of speech and expression through publication in any form in any medium of communication is restricted. Thus, I cannot speak out my plight to the people without express authorization from the Central Government or from any of its representatives. It surely must be imperative in the interest of national security to do so, but what about the political representatives who are supposed to act on my behalf in front of the citizens whom I am required to protect? And am not I a citizen of my own nation-state, whom the State is supposed to look after?

I do not demand an explanation or a verbal response from you: I've had many in the past. What I need from you and your ministers is concerted action that would prevent my future avatars from getting routed due to systemic lapses. This would be the biggest tribute that I can ask for.

Your sincere guardian,

Anonymous Soldier

Fangs of Free Speech

In his classic work "On Liberty", John Stuart Mill had made a strong cause for the need for freedom of speech and expression. Voltaire, one of the leading lights of the French Revolution, had famously said that even if he doesn't agree with someone on an issue, he'll defend until death the right of that person to express his/her opinion. Democracy, i.e., rule of the people, rests upon the freedom of expression of the citizens as one of its essential requisites. Why is there a need for the State to occasionally infringe upon the right of free speech? Shouldn't there be an absolute right to free speech? Let us examine these issues in detail, while making a particular recent instance—that triggered [yet again] a debate on the need for having an absolute right of free expression—the focal point of this essay.

The Makers of Modern India, i.e., the members of the Constituent Assembly gave the status of a Fundamental Right to the Freedom of Speech and Expression (Article 19). This means that an aggrieved individual, whose fundamental right of free speech and expression has been abrogated, can directly approach the Supreme Court of India under the Right to Constitutional Remedies (which itself has been made a fundamental right under Article 32). World over, free speech and expression have been kept as things paramount to the establishment of a democratic polity. It is on this very premise that China and Russia are criticized by the West for having subdued their citizens' rights through strict tools of media censorship. 'Je suis Charlie' and voices against Boko Haram focus on the need to give people the right to express themselves—be it through speech, literature, artistry or through education. Lead bullets are way too weaker than the conviction of numerous Malala Yousufzais, who have an aspiration to rise above the sheepish crowd by exercising their right of free speech.

The rise of social media has provided an entirely new pathway to those looking to express themselves and rise above the curtains of censorship. The small white 'f' in a blue background and the small blue bird—the respective logos of Facebook and Twitter—have become two of the numerous totems that connect 'netizens' all over the globe, many of whom aspire to cast away most of the taboos passed on through generations. While evincing great interest in the social media, there is also a need to keep at bay its ability to fan the fire of rumours and create mass congregations swiftly.

Even amongst clarion calls for imparting absolute freedoms of expression to the people, it should be noted that the wisdom of the framers of our constitution compelled them to subject the rights guaranteed under the Article 19 to "reasonable restrictions"—"public order", "decency", "morality" among the many restrictions explicitly mentioned. One might argue as to who is going to be the authority for defining the terms "decency" and "morality". A logical answer to this, keeping in mind the social contract theories, is the State in due deliberation with the civil society. Besides, this was the most that English language allowed the constitution makers to express themselves. No matter how objective one may aspire to be, there will always be a degree of subjectivity in the words of a statute.

There is a need for the State to exercise restraint while making use of provisions of Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, as was done in the case of two young girls in Maharashtra after one of them questioned the need for a curfew in Maharashtra after Bal Thackeray's death and the other 'liked' it on Facebook. Also, the crackdown on expression of political dissent by numerous Aseem Trivedis needs be curbed. At the same time, content developers have a responsibility towards the society. They should understand that opposition to certain works, which they might have developed with a bonafide intent, may not always be from a bunch of right-wing extremists looking out for cheap publicity by making loud proclamations of attempts of destruction of the Indian cultural fabric. The opposition could very well be a manifestation of the 'inertia of tradition'—the hegemonic presence of certain ideas in the society—to change which will take much more than impulsive outbursts of creativity.

Let us see why movies, videos and music are considered at a different pedestal in India (even by the watchful eyes of the State) as compared to other forms of mass media. It is quite comprehensible that content propagated through the auditory (or audio-visual) route is more effective in conveying information to the listeners (or viewers), as compared to that written in books or in the print media. This may also be because of certain constraints such as lack of literacy among the listeners/viewers. It should also be noted that much of the works of public intellectuals are present in English, and as the ASER 2014 reports narrate, the access to such works may be constrained by lack of adequate literary skills. Another factor may be the prohibitive costs of such works. On the other hand, movies are made in regional languages too. Regional issues are addressed by the movies made in the regional language and the propagation of national issues is taken care of by the swiftly growing system of creation of remakes of movies into other languages. Thus, certain movies or videos or songs have the capability to evoke an outrage among a certain section of the society. A case in point can be the movie Dam 999 which was perceived to be akin to one representing the Mullaperiyar Dam between Tamil Nadu and Kerala. And so, it can sometimes be justifiable to place a certain check on the screening of such movies if they are perceived to be non-conducive to public order. The need for a Censor Board can also be justified on the ground that it serves as an expert panel (whose members have enough experience) to determine what effects a movie can have on the audience and which parts should not be aired in theatres.

I now move to the topic of stand-up comedy. Mime and stand-up comedy are instruments that chiefly employ humour to achieve certain ends—to present political dissent, or to achieve social reform, or to reform an individual, or just to achieve humour as an end in itself. 'Roasting' is an idea that was born in the West. 'Roast' is considered opposite to a 'toast' (in which a person is honoured for a cause). In a 'Roast', certain comedians gather at a place to make mock-fun of certain individual(s) after having received their consent. This is intended in good humour, and the motive is to promote self-criticism and to entertain an audience. In the following portion, I'll move to the focal point of the essay—the controversy over the "AIB Knockout". My interest on this topic was greatly evinced after I read a lot about this in the print media in the past few weeks. One particularly compelling work over the controversy was Sanjay Hegde's article "The lawlessness of humour" in The Hindu dated 23 February 2015.

"AIB Knockout" perused Out-and-Out

According to the AIB team, the AIB Knockout episode was one meant to be viewed by a private audience. The proceeds of the programme went for a charitable cause. The organizers had obtained the consent of the parties involved. Further, any of their works is not intended to offend anyone but is rather a creative work intended to arouse humour. Additionally, they cited the number (~8 million) of 'hits' and 'views' of their YouTube video as something that signifies their popularity. Let us go for a step-by-step evaluation of their assertions.

First of all, as mentioned before, the concept of roasting has been taken from the West (from the US). Considering that the Indian society is still conservative at large, except for a section among the middle class and the rich which has got influenced by modernity (they can very well be assumed to be a coterie, if their percentage is calculated out of the population of India), holding such an event would have been a risky proposition due to pungent criticism as one of its fallouts. It could still have been considered acceptable (it would have remained in obscurity and would have only been discussed by the audience in their future conversations) had it not been openly shared by the AIB group (only to be removed later) on YouTube. The group might have posted disclaimers in the video itself. However, it is a common observation that people may not stop biting into the 'forbidden fruit' for the very simple logic—what harm may come from watching a video? Then, this very act of promotion of such content that is acceptable to only a small coterie of individuals raises questions on the use of "All India" in the title AIB of the group. This group can, in no way, be pan-Indian in character.

Next, let us examine the issue of 'hits' and 'views' on YouTube. The AIB team have themselves admitted that they rely on social media for hosting their content owing to a resource crunch. Social media works through a mechanism of peer review. And that is possible only when people watch the content. A large number of views does not necessarily mean that the people have approved of the content. Also, a substantial number of the 'views' may very well have been of NRIs. The problem with 'hits' and 'views' is that they do not count the 'views' based on an Internet Protocol (IP) address of the viewer (which is an address unique to the device on which the content is viewed). Thus, it is quite possible that a person may have viewed a video multiple times on the same device (this rests on the assumption that the person might have removed the history on his/her internet browser). It is also possible that the same person might have watched the video multiple times on different devices (say for showing it to someone else). Then, the 'likes' and 'dislikes' may not be an exact parameter for determining the general perception of the video among the society.

Further, the AIB team have themselves thanked the people for not having downloaded the whole video and for not having put it on a torrent website. Had they been more careful in their deeds earlier, they would not have to face the music later. Besides, a chickening on such an issue represents the lack of courage to stand by their work. Let me put an allegory as well. Putting that video on YouTube was akin to hosting a bacchanalian event in a small corner of a busy market place. Even though the participants might assert that they do not at all intend to outrage the modesty of the society, the event has to be censured and repressed by the Leviathan-like instruments of the State (read police) for having ample statistical evidence that such events have created social disorders in the past.

Then, the video contains not disguised but explicit sexually-coloured remarks, references to genitalia and vulgar language. Such a video should not have been shared on a social media platform. And merely classifying it as humorous doesn't help either. I issue a blatant, unequivocal, strenuous censure of this and I overtly say that it wasn't humorous at all. And let me add, for all those who will be quick to categorize and compartmentalize me [on the basis of my views] into preset fashionable categories, that I'm in no way affiliated to any right-wing fundamentalist organization. In fact, I am open in the condemnation of such groups whenever they commit any dastardly act.

And let me demolish the final pillar of their reasoning. It has been stated that the proceeds of the event went to charity. And the audience was entertained. Very well. In Ancient Rome, the game of gladiators used to be very famous. In the present day, would it be entertaining to watch a Maximus Decimus Meridius hack human beings to pieces in real life (even if the proceeds were to go to charity)? This would go against the Kantian maxim of treating each man as an end in itself and not using other humans as means to an end. People may say that there is a vast difference between physical violence and such a roasting event. Recall what the veteran Bollywood actor Aamir Khan has expressed (who is venerated in the society for his show Satyamev Jayate)—that violence need not always be physical and the AIB Knockout event was akin to 'verbal violence'.

Having analyzed all this and before concluding, let me present a case of psychoanalysis. What the so-called comedians of AIB Knockout have tried to do is to use the theory of 'cognitive dissonance' of psychology (which assumes that human beings have an inherent desire to remove any internal contradictions. The method used by these jugglers was to present a video which might create a doubt in the minds of the people about well-established norms of socially-acceptable behaviour. The rest of the work was done by the so-called proponents of free speech who are always on the lookout for any opportune moment to vent out their ire at right-wingers. Unfortunately, in this case too, the Public Interest Litigation was filed in the Bombay High Court by certain members of a Hindu right-wing affiliated group. This gave some merit to the supporters' views. Meanwhile, the AIB did succeed in achieving a lot of publicity through this controversy. If their aim was to initiate a process of a social engineering by acting as the harbingers of roasting in India at a grand level by roping-in Bollywood actors, it remains to be seen if they have achieved it or not.

As of now, in the interest of public order, such tendencies need to be curtailed in the near future (if not in the distant one). John Stuart Mill had also given a condition when free speech could be suppressed by the use of power—if this free speech had the effect of harming the society (referred to as the 'Harm Principle'). The same needs to be done in the abovementioned cases as well. The creative people also have a larger responsibility towards the society. They need to thoroughly assess the social realities and the likely outcomes of a creation before releasing it to the public. In this regard, it would be apt to keep hyper-liberals in check in the desire for a peaceful society. 'Free speech' is an utopia. To conclude, I quote Jean-Jacques Rousseau—man must "be forced to be free".

Do we need a 'God'?

"Religion was born when the first charlatan met the first fool on the earth."

—Voltaire

The Socratic method of dialectics works quite well when one strives to solve some conundrums that baffle one's mind. John Stuart Mill had emphasized on the need for freedom of speech and expression. The outcome of such a freedom in a civilized environment is dialectics—the method which leads one to the 'truth'. And what is 'truth'? There is almost nothing known as the 'absolute truth' or a 'universal truth'. Perhaps, one thing that is absolute is change. Otherwise, the 'universality' of an idea can contested on the very premise that the word 'universal' itself is an abstraction. The term 'universally established principles' is used for some discourses, which have been recognized and accepted by a large number of individuals or an influential body of individuals on this very planet Earth. In fact, man doesn't even know the exact expanse of the universe, for want of better technology. In such a scenario, it becomes highly questionable how the followers of a particular religion can so fanatically and zealously adhere to a particular set of beliefs as to exhibit elitism, a condescending attitude towards the followers of other religions and xenophobia.

I happened to ponder, yet again, over religion and such other related topics after I had numerous discussions with a number of friends—the utility of dialectics. I have also had the honour of reading an essay written by Bhagat Singh during the days he was incarcerated for breaking the laws (implemented by a handful of Englishmen who presumed that they were on a 'civilizing mission', and created by their counterparts lodged comfortably overseas while basking in the comforts of the home charges). His essay titled "Why I am an Atheist" has had a deep impact on my thoughts. I've also read "The Kingdom of God is within You" by Leo Tolstoy. Then, I had in front of me the examples of famous agnostics—Ishwar Chandra Vidyasagar, Jawaharlal Nehru, Khushwant Singh, to name a few. Meanwhile critics cannot attack my views (which I'll present in the upcoming paragraphs) on the basis of the reasoning that I haven't gone through the works of great believers. I've read "The Story of My Experiments with Truth" (Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi). I realized that the synergy that Gandhi felt exists between morality and the existence of a God ('Ram' for him), i.e., a Supreme Soul, can very well be explained differently—without ascribing morality to an omnipresent, omnipotent and omniscient power which keeps a watchful eye over his creation. While countering immorality with deterrence through fear of otherwise attracting the wrath of a God may have a utilitarian value, to me it is a sign of lack of confidence in one's own abilities of bonafide judgment.

The Idea of 'God'

A friend of mine, who is studying to become a doctor, suggested to me that God must be there. If it weren't for him, the chaos in this world would be multiple times the present level. I felt that while he vociferously pressed on this point, it was a very knave thing to be averred. If there was a Supreme Being or a God, he wouldn't have allowed injustice in this world. The burning alive of a Jordanian pilot by the fighters of the Islamic State (who, interestingly, claim that their actions are based on their own interpretation of the Islamic religion) would have been prevented, had there been a God. If he didn't purposely prevent, is he a sadist? And if he couldn't, then he isn't Supreme. It is incomprehensible to me why certain individuals commit barbaric and heinous crimes in the name of this very God. Is that too part of the very script created by him?

The proponents of 'karma' can offer that the pilot might have received this treatment because of his actions in this life or the previous life. It is a fantastic belief and there is no conclusive evidence of it. While this metaphysical concept of birth cycles and rebirth is a very fancy explanation of certain phenomenon and I too do not contest (even if I do not personally subscribe to) this view, there seems to be no reason to adhere to another belief—the existence of a God who regulates and controls all the happenings in this world. This dual belief, to me, pulls one into the gossamer of beliefs and abstractions—for supporting which, no empirical evidence can be advanced.

My personal experience, so far, has been that the rhetoric of 'turning unbelievers into believers'—by the exhibition of miracles—is nothing but a figment of people's hyperactive imagination. A common man usually starts believing in something when some empirical evidence is presented to support a certain assertion. And this work of presentation of such evidences can very well be 'doctored' or 'engineered' to one's convenience. The fundamental basis of all this is the human mind's extraordinary capability to recognize patterns among ordinary occurrences. So, half the work of entrapment into this belief about the presence of a Divine is done by a person's own mind. The other half of the work involves the creation of an enabling environment—an aura or a Gramscian hegemony—which ascribes those 'miracles' to this 'Supreme Being'. My answer to all such 'converts' is that if one is so fickle as to start believing in a thing just because of lack of a better explanation for such 'miracles', one's previous conviction isn't strong enough. A 'miracle' is something that had been hitherto unseen and unheard of or unverified by some globally-recognized enlightened individuals. An absence of an explanation for such a phenomenon is no cogent reason to infer that a God has been behind such an act.

Religion—the pathway to 'God'

'Natural science' also works on certain assumptions, as has been pointed out by Thomas Kuhn. Thus, there is nothing absolute—for these assumptions are nothing but beliefs that simplification of problems would not deter us very much from the path of truth. In this context, I try to present the definition of 'religion' the way I perceive it.

'Religion' is a set of beliefs adhered to by a certain individual or a group of individuals to provide sails to their boat in this ocean called life. Religion, as a way of life, helps one to achieve nearness to 'God' by following a righteous path.

Inasmuch as religion is used to convey a meaning of a well-defined and collectively-accepted set of beliefs to lead a righteous life, I have no problem. Personally, even I adhere to certain principles of conduct and some people, if they feel the need for nomenclature, may call it my 'religion'. In this, I find the Shakespearean dictum—"What's in a name? That which you call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet"—an apt one.

What I am against, however, is commercialization of religion with a view to achieve vested interests and monetary gains. The very idea of ornament-clad stone idols "drinking" milk and honey (things which are a luxury, even while dreaming, to a substantial number of Indians) conveys to me a crystal-clear picture of a few charlatans' connivance with some selfish intelligentsia. In the past, I myself have witnessed unabashed displays of 'religion' and almost-extortion in the name of Gods—in Kalighat temple of Kolkata, in Vishwanath temple of Varanasi, in Mansa Devi temple of Haridwar, in the Dargah of 'Ghareeb Nawaz' in Ajmer, and many more. If a Bollywood movie by the name of "Oh My God" targets this facade of the godmen, I think it is a splendid use of the freedom of speech and expression to pull out the Indian society from the clutches of medieval dogma. What the tricksters cash in on is fear that is inherent among the people. And this fear has to be reinforced through establishment of the hegemony of ignorance. What's worse is that a certain section of the electronic media dedicates half-hour shows to create sensationalism and boost its TRPs. These half-hour shows have no dearth of religious pundits trying to tear the society by the fangs of medievalism.

Another aspect, which I would like to analyse, is religious chauvinism and fanaticism. Let me present my case systematically. It is said that religion is a pathway to a 'God'. Had there been different Gods, there would have been chaos as to who should have a supremacy over the creation (in my opinion, I exhibit an outright denial of any functional specialization ascribed to different Gods as propounded by the Hindu mythology). Thus, God can be a single power. And this should be true about all religions. Thus, in essence, all religions should lead to that 'God'. Continuing with this line of reasoning, all religions must agree on certain basic points. The question is—if all religions have the same goal and if they have many (if not all) common points, why is there a need to present the followers of certain religions as antagonistic to others? Xenophobia propagated by extremists signifies only one thing—the desire to achieve material gains and power by fanning mutual hatred through the use of jargon such as "love jihad". Such tendencies should be jettisoned from the fabric of a country that proclaims to have a secular polity.

Let me make an honest confession. I was born in a family, which has the 'Brahmin' social identity ascribed to it. While I still bear the same affection towards my family as most others would have towards theirs, I am in no way 'proud' of 'being a Brahmin'. In fact, I do not even care about which community I was born in. I believe that I, as a human being, am endowed with wisdom and I do not need to subscribe to preordained communities to life a harmonious life. While religious fanatics might hold Macaulay's education and "western ideas" responsible for my line of thinking, I am satisfied that atleast I do not treat others as means to an end; rather, I consider each person an end in himself/herself. And although I personally do not approve of Valentine's Day and the increasing craze about Valentine's Week in India in the recent years (all thanks to globalization), I do not consider it my right to resort to moral policing of others due to some misplaced notions about conservation of Hinduism and the "Hindu culture" loitering around in my head. What exacerbates the situation is the indulgence of certain religious-cum-political leaders, prophets, 'sadhus', 'sadhvis', 'maharajas', etc., in 'mazhab ki siyaasi dukaandaari' (political trade in the garb of religion). These godmen even intrude into the private sphere of families and individuals, e.g., their advices on how much children the women belonging to a certain religion must bear.

Can any religion sanction the killing of innocent people perceived to be 'unbelievers'? If it does, then I dare say that it better be thrown to the dogs. 'Boko Haram'—"western education is a sin"—is a brainchild of those aspiring to establish a kingdom based on the fundamental tenet of ignorance. And to enforce this ignorance, the use of terror is resorted to.

What is required is a thoughtful deconstruction of such tactics to understand the ulterior motives involved. At the same time, there is a need to positively channelize the energy of the youth in a society. The cocktail of dissatisfaction and romanticism may otherwise lead them to become the foot-soldiers of some pseudo-messiah, which will eventually be carcinogenic to the whole idea of India as a nation.

The Happening

DISCLAIMER: The author of this blog has no belief in the supernatural. By means of this story, which the author had written during his college days, the author wants to convey certain messages to the readers. In the story, the readers may choose to ignore the incoherence of the names of the characters (English names) with the names of the events (Indian events). The characters and the events have been named at random, and any resemblance to any real-life characters/events shall be purely co-incidental.

I stood there, gazing at the fading lights and expecting something to occur; a happening, perhaps, was what I wanted. It could be anything which would suggest to me what I had failed to analyse in my retrospection. Could fate give me a sign? What was it that I need to change? What possible self-transformation could bring enlightenment to my soul? In my career, what were the odds in my favour? Am I a cynic? These and many more questions were baffling my mind. If an observer were to read my mind back then, it would take a Herculean effort to make sense of my thoughts back then. I was utterly confused and fickle.

It was a cold winter evening. A strong wind was, time-and-again, whistling through the eerie silence. Sundown for that day had been a few minutes old now. The blanket of darkness was over-eager to engulf the land. A short while back, I had witnessed twilight. It was like a battle—the never-ending battle between the day and the night. Now, the distant lights struggled with the Dark Lord, willing to give their best to those who 'owned' that light. Strange, isn't it? Homo sapiens claim that they have devised ways to tame light! Yet this very light brings destruction when it visits the earth during a storm.

It was my favourite spot. I was at the boulevard near the airport. On an average, I could witness arrivals and departures to and from the airport at a frequency of one each every 10 minutes. Yes, it was my favourite spot! For hours I could gaze at the sky and yet I would never get bored of this ritual.

The place where I was perched was dimly lit. A distant lamp-post was making things vaguely visible. To resolve inner conflicts, I always preferred to sit at a place in solitude. The silence, howsoever deafening it might be, could provide me with the peace that inner disturbance bestowed upon me.

I had a glance at my whiskey bottle. Its weight made me realize that it was almost empty, except for the few drops of clear brown liquor that evaded my lips and preferred to adhere to the bottle. I had had eight large pegs and still wanted more. I reached my pocket for the pack of cigarettes. I drew out one from the half-filled box and searched for my lighter. I couldn't find it. I got up, searched my pockets over and over again, but still couldn't find it. Was the liquor taking its toll on my neurons? Yes it was. Nevertheless, I usually do not count myself among those who can't control themselves in inebriation. I recalled that I had heard something fall off my trouser pocket when I was on the way to this spot. I hadn't paid much heed to it back then; my mind was too occupied to pay attention to nitty-gritties.

It was a classic Harley Davidson lighter, gifted to me by one of my close friends. The feeling of lament at my loss started to engulf me. It is strange that even in moments of drunken stupor, man doesn't let go of feelings of attachment towards material things is he is emotionally attached with those things. Ethanol does have the capacity to bring out candour in a man. My short reverie was broken when I figured out a man, some yards away from where I was standing. He was smoking a cigar. Here was my man. I asked me—"Excuse me! Do you have a light?" From the man, I could see a nod in affirmation. I could make this out as I saw the light on his burning cigar move in an oscillatory motion—up and down—in the air. I moved up to the man and had my cigarette lit.

"How come here, son?" was what was shot at me.

I am not a man who easily breaks into a conversation with strangers. It is not elitism, which is a cause of this habit of mine. Yet, I certainly do not feel the urge to speak to someone just because he or she is standing next to me. And thus, a question like this would have even made me feel that the speaker is an intruder into my private world. Yet, I could not leave that question unanswered for that would have amounted to impoliteness on my part.

"Just wanted to fix something", I calmly replied. The smoke from my nicotine-stick was being carried away by the wind. I could even sense some apparitions in that smoke. I have had a brilliant imagination ever since I remember having started to fathom things from the days of my childhood. Thus, I could always make out patterns in events which most others might have found too normal to notice.

"You know, the doors of perception need to be cleansed, if you are to make your journey worthwhile", the man said to me. It was a pretty philosophical line. I could, from his statement, make out that [provided the man wasn't faking] the man was either a fellow much more experienced that I am or a man with a philosophical inclination.

I now started to have a close look at my companion. He seemed to be a man in his late thirties. He had a long stature; about six feet tall he was. It seemed that he was wearing a long trench-coat. I could smell the Davidoff Cool Water perfume that he seemed to have miserly applied to his clothes.

"This is the place I usually come to, whenever I need to resolve a conflict in my mind", he said.

Now, there seemed to be odds in favour of a conversation. One, I had a companion in an otherwise deserted place. Two, the person seemed to share with me fondness for this place. Three, this older person might have some advice for me. Four, I wasn't anyway going to move out of that place until the effect of the alcohol on my nerves lessened a bit.

"I'm Pete Mitchell", I said to my companion. "I'm Major Kaffee", he replied and we shook hands. Yes, his firm handshake was testimony to the assertion that he had a military background.

"So Mitchell, what draws you here on this not-so-pleasant evening?"

"Well, Sir, I had some issues in my mind—issues that I need to pay attention to."

"I would like to hear more, young man, if you don't mind."

"Sir, I've been sitting here for an hour-and-a-half now, yet I wasn't able to come up with the solution to my quagmire. Perhaps, Mr Jack Daniels has taken its toll on my ability to comprehend. I could use some help."

"Go ahead, son."

"I used to work as an investment banker. It's been two years since I started working for that bank. Recently, I've had a promotion. The job used to fetch me good money. But honestly, I didn't like the job because of two reasons. One was the bosses' attitude towards their subordinates. The other was the long working hours, which left me with no time to experience what Davies had called 'leisure'." I paused to have a glance at his face. He seemed to be interested, and this convinced me that my playing the narrator was not proving to be a futile exercise.

"Continue", he said.

"Today was one of the worst days of my life. As I entered the office, I was informed that the boss wanted to meet me. I went to his cabin. He offered me a glass of water and told me to be comfortably seated. What followed was a group of arrows shot at me, aimed at my heart. He said, 'As you know Pete, these aren't good times for our business. Recession has badly hit the globe and companies are witnessing declining profits. It's been a difficult task for the companies to continue with the same strength of workforce that they used to have previously. Our organization, too, has decided to restructure. The higher management was to send to me a list of employees who have to be relieved to ease the economic pressure on the company. I received this list today. I want you to have a look at the list.' I guess you must be very much able to figure out what would have happened next."

"Yes, I can infer that based on the analysis of your appearance right now."

There was a silence for about two minutes. From the nature of the winds, I could sense that a storm was about to come. My imagination said to me that the storm was a depiction of the uneasiness that was prevalent within me at that moment. Kaffee was emitting dense puffs of cigar smoke, like a chimney, from his mouth. Soon, my eyelids started getting shaky in the silence that seemed to have descended. I was about to get over-powered by slumber when his voice interrupted.

"How old are you, son? You must be in your twenties, I guess", he said to me.

"Twenty three."

"Well, you see son, I am going to tell you some things now. When I was of your age, I had quite a good comprehension. I was able to see through people, to analyse situations and to deduce from seemingly complex situations. I think I will be able to tell you something which might benefit you in the long run."

Given the fact that I had put in some effort to converse with him and that I wasn't able to think about a solution to my problem myself, I was willing to listen to him in anticipation of some words of wisdom.

He continued, "I am quite certain you will extract a few ideas for use in your best interest."

I was very much willing to listen to the older guy.

"But before I continue with my narrative, let me ask you a question. What do you want, son?"

What was this? "What do you mean by 'what do you want'?", I shot back.

"I mean, what is it that you want for yourself, with utmost passion? For which single aim in life would you willingly give away all that you have, and yet be content to achieve that single thing?"

And I was speechless. I could not think of any such thing. Was there any such thing? Could there be such a thing?

"Pete, wake up! Wake up, Pete! Meeting with the boss: twenty minutes", my colleague woke me up. Phew! "Why do you have to interrupt my reverie?", I asked. "If I don't, the boss will make sure that you won't afford to have any more dream in future", was her prompt reply.

"You know, hadn't you been a drop-dead gorgeous person, I would have killed you."

"Oh! Thank you! Now get ready for work", she glanced at me with impish eyes and whisked away. I went to the washroom and started splashing water on my face.

What an evening that was! It wasn't fiction which I was reminiscing. That cold winter evening was so fresh in my mind: I can pen down each and every detail on a piece of paper. I entered my workspace again. There were still fifteen minutes left for the meeting. I closed my eyes and was lost again in the recollection of the events which followed on that evening.

"What, do you think, I was doing when you were drinking yourselves to insanity? I was observing a young man—a man whose mind is facing turbulence. I noticed each and every action of yours, son. A man of your age thinks that he has seen too much in life and is quite experienced. This kind of thought is what starts dragging you into dangerous waters. Son! Life is, indeed, synonymous with treading on the sharp edge of a razor. But, through conscious and logical decisions, one can move through a path of thorns as gracefully as if one is walking on a bed of roses. Failures and tough times come for two reasons—one, to provide you with the stepping stones to success, and two, to make you somewhat immune to suffering and to toughen you up for the challenges ahead."

This person was definitely trying to help, I thought. I had to listen to him intently.

"Son, I was commissioned as a lieutenant in the Army. Back then, I was twenty one. Since I started thinking about career, I knew that I wanted to join the defence forces. Choosing a career option was not an arduous task for me. Whatever hardships one sees in defence forces makes one rise above petty considerations, such as prejudice, envy. It was in all these years of my career that I learnt to face life like a fighter. Son! I can tell you that you, as does each and every individual on this earth, have a part of the Supreme manifested in you. You just need to keep on discovering your potential. Seemingly impossible tasks will themselves pave way for the doors to success; you have to use your observation and your 'vivek' to extract the solution of a problem. You have to realize what your peccadilloes are, and then work upon them to increase your strengths."

"There is one other thing, son. If you decide to go for something, never back down, no matter how tough the resistance is. You must believe in yourself. You will, unquestionably, achieve your goal. Perseverance is the key to success. Labour Omnia Vincit, son. Genuine efforts never go in vain. And who says opportunity knocks at the door but once? I can tell you that life offers a large number of prospects, you just have to watch out for them."

By now, he had finished smoking his cigar. I had developed a sense of admiration for him. He was playing the perfect guide for me—this at a time when I needed these directions the most. There was a moment of silence. The storm within me had started to subside; I felt much relaxed now.

It had started to drizzle. A flash of lightning appeared in the northern sky. In the light emitted by that flash, I saw that my companion had a scar on his face; it was probably a blemish from his war experience.

"I'm now going to tell you something about my experiences from Operation Vijay, son. Anyone facing  dire straits might think, in the first instance, that he/she is the most miserable person on earth. I hope that my narration gives you an idea about having a positive attitude towards things. Never wail over the 'bad experiences'. They are one of the best teachers in life."

"Son, we were given the task to capture Peak 5140 (Tiger Hill) in Kashmir. Pakistani infiltrators had a strategic advantage in that they were perched atop higher reaches. They could sense an ambush at its first signs. During our final attack, we lost many men to raining bullets and bombs. Many of my friends died in front of my eyes."

He now gazed directly into my eyes and said, "Son! Let your imagination grasp you thoroughly. Can you imagine the pain felt by a man when a bullet pierces his skin and lodges itself inside him? Can you visualize how it feels to see the gush of warm blood out of your body? There is biting cold outside. Slowly, the poison of the gunpowder spreads in your body. And you are helpless. Do you know what it is to see your friend breathe his last in front of you, all the while expecting you to create some magic to improve his condition? You can't do anything except consoling him and watching him die. In a lot of instances, we had to carry the mutilated bodies of our friends on our shoulders. The shrapnel sometimes damages the nerves and renders a person incapable of motion."

"I tell you these things today because I want you to know that pain and suffering are a part and parcel of life. You have to learn from your pain and look at the brighter side of life; in our case, the thing that gives me satisfaction is that we won what we aimed for."

I looked towards him. I could sense that feelings of satisfaction and pride clearly marked his voice. Evidently, our courage drives us through all the adversities.

By now, it had started to pout heavily. Yet, I wanted to remain there with my companion. That rain seemed to wash away all the doubts that obscured my mind. However, my companion told me that he had to leave.

I thanked him for the light that he had poured on this troubled soul. I asked him for his contact number, but he said that he would contact me sometime or might call on me. He memorized my telephone number.

"I guess I have to return to my Elysium, the place where I'm posted since quite a long time", he said. "I would like to meet you again", I expressed. "Well, I hope you do well", he replied. It was strange that his voice seemed shaky and he had tears in his eyes when he left. I couldn't guess what had made him sentimental all of a sudden. He took off in his vintage Jaguar 1956 XT140 roadster.

"This was, indeed, some happening", I thought as I too left for my abode.

I had known what I wanted to. With the benefit of hindsight only, a man is able to tell what purpose a particular event had in his life. I got a job, that too in a renowned firm, within a week of that fateful day. Au revoir misery! And it has been exactly three years since then. On this day, 5th July 2010, I consider myself blessed as I recall the events of that day.

I believe that there is no need to feel dejected in times of despair. Nature always provides one with the answers to one's questions—that day, I witnessed a sign which I was in desperate need of.

Yesterday, I was going through the newspapers when something caught my attention. And I did not know how to react. There was a small rectangular column in the obituaries—Maj. Daniel Kaffee, MVC (Posthumous), is remembered by 18 Grenadiers for the supreme sacrifice made on 4th July 1999 during the attack on Tiger Hill.

His words echoed in my ears—"I guess I have to return to my Elysium..."