Today though, Matthews met his match. The man was William Kostric, now famous as the guy who carried a gun to a town hall in New Hampshire where President Obama spoke today. Kostric held his own when placed under the scanner. He appeared informed, and did not wilt under Matthews’ usual lines of questioning — Chris, who is more well-read than most people he interviews always tries to browbeat the other person on his knowledge of history. Here is the video. I thought it was a champion performance. What do you say?

Update:

I think the point where Chris realized that Bill Kostric was not someone he could kick about at will was when Kostric told him that he had voted for Ron Paul in 2008. Had Kostric told Chris that he had voted for McCain, the tone would have changed considerably — Chris would have done his daily Palin-bashing routine, questioning the intelligence of those who voted for a woman who was “one 72 year-old’s heartbeat away from the Presidency.” While there is no doubt that Sarah Palin was, and still is, almost completely unqualified to serve as President or VP, the liberal crowd has to stop milking this topic as a defensive tactic.

No related posts.

She ends her piece with an impassioned appeal to the world – whatever that refers to – to “step in. Now. Before it’s too late.” Step in, yes, Ms. Roy, and do what? I understand that there is a colossal humanitarian tragedy unfolding in that island. As a Tamilian (and even otherwise), my heart bleeds when I consider the plight of those caught in the middle of this terrible disaster, and mostly for no fault of their own. Yet, what can India or Norway or the United States or any other country do in this regard? Other than your characteristic mud-flinging at the powers that be, what have YOU done?

No related posts.

The Pilibhit police on Tuesday registered a case against Bharatiya Janata Party candidate Varun Gandhi for his allegedly inflammatory speeches on the directions of the Election Commission.

No related posts.

The media has been awash with Slumdog mania. The British media claims it is a British movie, the Indian press points to the movie’s roots. But yes, DNA tests are what the media is good at. And they always uncover many fathers.

Like Albert Einstein once said: “If my theory of relativity is proven successful, Germany will claim me as a German and France will declare that I am a citizen of the world. Should my theory prove untrue, France will say that I am a German and Germany will declare that I am a Jew.”

* But yes, even Titanic was a masala flick, and it won Best Picture.

No related posts.

Ms. Ghose, in attempting to push Mr. Jethmalani into a corner for his decision to defend Manu Sharma in the Jessica Lall murder trial, found not just stiff resistance but a determined onslaught on the press for the unwarranted privileges that it has assumed.

If you notice, when Ms. Ghose does realize that her argument has no merit, she then tries to give the argument an emotional angle, by saying, “But even your family does not want you to take up the case.” And falls flat on her face.

The crowing moment is when she says that the press has to be activist because the high and mighty get away easily, and that the press is a sounding board, the last resort and reflective of the public opinion in India. The response: “It is your channel. You can give yourself whatever tribute you want.”

No related posts.

No related posts.

The topic of discussion this morning was the money that former New York Stock Exchange chairman, Richard Grasso had taken home, roughly $190 million. Pat Buchanan launched a tirade on CNBC’s Lawrence Kudlow for his unabashed support of Grasso’s compensation.

The funniest part comes after Kudlow opines that Grasso must be lauded for his “Herculean” efforts to restart the operations of the NYSE in ten days. Buchanan shoots back saying, “Now, that’s what he got paid a $5 million bonus for. Did any of the New York City firemen get a $5 million bonus?” The other rib-ticking moment came when Buchanan asked, “Why does he get so many million dollars when he leaves? What did they pay him a salary for?”

While I disagree with Buchanan’s views on executive pay, I must say that the way he argued against it was funny. Incidentally, Kudlow chided Buchanan during the discussion for sounding like Obama’s echo. Jack Welch was also at the discussion table.

Here is the video of the episode from MSNBC.

No related posts.

I had already written about Aahaa FM which streams live online.

In case you are interested in the URL for the streams:

• Aahaa FM — mms://74.54.85.4/AahaaFM or rtsp://74.54.85.4/AahaaFM
• Suriyan FM — mms://66.180.172.26/suryanFMchennai or rtsp://66.180.172.91/suryan_FM

No related posts.

No related posts.

In its endorsement, the editorial board states, in no uncertain terms, why the Illinois Senator is better equipped than Hillary Clinton. One of the main reasons behind the paper’s choice seems to be Senator Obama’s reaching out to everyone, irrespective of their race, economic status or political affiliation. Specifically, his ability to work more closely with Republicans (while Senator Clinton is a deeply polarizing figure, who overlooked the so-called “small” states and “red” states) is regarded very highly.

But the most stinging remark about Senator Clinton is that she has chosen to portray the successes of the Bill Clinton administration as her own.

We are frankly troubled by her assumption that her husband’s administration and accomplishments were her own. And if her equation holds, that the first spouse is an equal partner in the administration, then the reappearance of Bill Clinton in the White House is a prospect we have a hard time reconciling with the work that needs to be done.

The paper also points to Senator Obama’s well-managed campaign as a possible indicator of an efficient, well-run White House. In contrast, Senator Clinton’s bungled campaign points to her drawbacks as a leader. Some experts, though, have sought to dispel the notion that an effective campaign indicates a well-run administration. However, the editorial board is of the view that Senator Obama, having raised funds from hundreds of thousands of donors, will be conscious of his accountability to them.

Pennsylvania votes on the 22nd of April.

No related posts.

Over the past few weeks, I have become a huge fan of Vijay TV’s Neeya Naana. The talk show pits two groups of people against each other to discuss and argue about inane, inconclusive topics like “Are people happy before marriage or after?” or “Is romance in public places correct?” or “Should people believe in astrology?” Whereas, no conclusion is reached during the hour-long debate, it is fun to see people having a go at each other.

The strongest point of the show is the moderator, Gopinath. Seemingly well aware of the various shortcomings of the talk show, he treads the golden mean very well, ever alert to simmering tensions and quick to shifting perspectives when he senses trouble or repetition. Vijay TV, which has a long history of producing winners, has once again pulled it off, making this show, which airs on Sundays at 9 PM, one to wait a whole week for. Indeed one is led to think when was it last that one eagerly awaited a programme on television. Probably as far back to the days of “OLiyum Oliyum” on Doordarshan, decades ago. OLiyum Oliyum was a defining programme on Tamil television. It aired on Friday evenings, and the whole family looked forward to it, as if it were an event instead of a TV programme.

So despite the evident stupidity of the arguments expressed (of course, if you hand the microphone to an excitable Tamilian, and seat a couple of good-looking (?) girls in front of him, he will forget that he is on camera, and become a rare poet-philosopher-social scientist mixture), the show is worth watching at least for the fun portion. What a way to round off otherwise boring weekends!

No related posts.

Titled “Arrogance, is your name Kalaignar?“, this was a fantastic piece and took apart clinically the DMK’s bungling on the issue. For those who can read Tamil, here it is. Here is a rough translation of the same. I have tried to remain true to the editorial’s contents as far as possible.

That the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu makes a habit out of wounding the sentiments of Hindus is known to one and all. But his remarks at the recent DMK meeting in Erode is a new chapter in his anti-Hinduism stance.

The Central Government recently informed the Supreme Court of India that it was looking into ways of executing the Sethusamudram project without disturbing the Ram Setu (the bridge that Lord Rama is known to have built on his way to Lanka). This should certainly have rubbed the Chief Minister the wrong way. This is because his primary motive seems to be not the Sethusamudram project, but the demolition of the Ram Setu. Which is why the Centre’s stance angers him. But of what use is his anger?

Already the Congress Government seems to be reeling under fear of being toppled. So even if the DMK were to threaten the Congress with a withdrawal of support, it won’t really carry so much weight. The Centre’s actions not only seem to verify its respect for Lord Rama, but has also won it three months of breathing space on the issue.

In his address in Erode, the Chief Minister spewed his rhetoric: “There are some who believe that even today people will accept baseless, supersitious, even crazy beliefs. And they play on this by invoking Rama’s name. We are now in a situation where we can act in order to dispel the darkness that might surround us for ages; and it is with that view that I present before you an action-plan. The Central Government has submitted to right-wing communal forces, and is standing in the way of the Sethusamudram project. We should object to this unequivocally.”

Is it enough just to raise voices in unison? The Central Government seems to have subscribed to the “baseless, superstitious, even crazy beliefs let loose by communal forces.” Even the Union Minister for Law has commented that “Rama is an inseparable part of India’s culture. This is not a matter open to debate. Just like the Himalayas are the Himalayas, and the Ganga is the Ganga, so Rama is Rama. One doesn’t need to prove anything in this regard.”

The Centre has, in its communication to the Supreme Court, conveyed the message that it respects the sanctity of the Ramayana, and that it respects all religions; and in this matter, the Hindu religion specifically.

So the plan to plunge the country into “darkness for ages” is supported, even sponsored, by the Central Government. Then how on earth can the DMK continue to support the Central Government? How can the DMK hug onto ministerial berths in such a Government? If, as the Chief Minister contends, the Congress is shortselling the country to traitors, how can the DMK continue to be in power in Tamil Nadu with the support of that selfsame Congress party? Is this not a greater treachery on the part of the DMK? Is not the DMK compromising the lofty principles of Periyar by indulging in such treachery?

The only way the DMK can win over these traitors and their treachery is to withdraw its support to the Central Government, and also let the Congress party withdraw its support to the State Government. Why is the Chief Minister not doing this? Is he afraid of something? What reason can one ascribe to this other than his lust and greed for power?

The Chief Minister has even gone on to call the Central Government a sly fox, a chameleon. Then what can one describe him as, when he doesn’t have the guts to oppose the actions of the Central Government? The truth is that the Chief Minister doesn’t hesitate one bit when it comes to compromising the principles of Periyar in order to remain in power, and also see the members of his family remain firmly in positions of power. But he can let loose tons of rhetoric. When it comes to verbal battles, he ranks top of the pile. But when it comes to putting it into actions, he falls far short. His inaction, or rather inability to act, is because of his power-hungry attitude that helps the members of his family stay in power.

Now that he is unable to react to the Congress, who else can his rhetoric target? Yes, there is always the easy target – the sentiments of Hindus.

His eyes blinded by anger, the Chief Minister gets into his own when it comes to verbal volleys: “Who is Ram? Which engineering college did He attend? When exactly did He construct the bridge? Is there any proof?” There are some who spew hypocrisy thinking it is intelligent talk. How different is this?

If one says that the bridge was constructed by Ram, it doesn’t mean that He collected and arranged stones and built the bridge all by Himself. We read in history that a king constructed a temple, installed sculptures and so on. We don’t question, “Did he carry stones himself? Did he sculpt them himself?” Under his orders, a group of experts would have worked on the project and brought it to fruition. But we don’t mention the name of the sculptor when talking about the temples or the statues. Rather we refer to them as the work of the king. This is how it is all over the world.

The case of the Ram Setu is similar. While the Chief Minister habitually speaks ill of the Ramayana, he also doesn’t forget to misquote from the epic from time to time.

Valmiki describes the process thus:

The king of the seas aided Ram in the construction of the bridge. He even appointed Nala to help Rama. Nala was the son of Vishwakarma (who is considered the Creator of the worlds). He had not only inherited his father’s skill, but had also his full blessings. An expert, he at once ordered Sugriva to collect all the necessary construction material. Sugriva’s army of vanarars got into action immediately. (Here, it is instructive to distinguish vanarars from monkeys, which is what everyone assumes. Valmiki’s Ramayana notes that vanarars were skilled in construction work, and even used their skill to build huge palaces.)

With their help, rocks were gathered from mountains, trees felled and all the required material was brought to the coastline. The huge rocks were pushed into the sea, and the trees were placed atop the rocks. In this fashion, the bridge was built. Some commented that it looked like a constellation of stars, while some others felt it resembled the parting of the hair in the head. Over this bridge, Rama, Surgriva and his army crossed the ocean into Lanka.

So, instead of sounding like an ignoramus, the Chief Minister should at least have asked, “Which engineering college did Nala attend?” To which our answer would have been “He learnt the skill from his father, who was an expert.” Will the selfsame Chief Minister who quips, “Where did Rama learn civil engineering?” also ask the following questions?

• Legend has it that Kannagi burnt the city of Madurai by culling her breasts and throwing it at the city. Where did she learn this technique? Did she major in Biology? Or nuclear engineering?

Will the Hon’ble Chief Minister stoop to ask such a question? WE will not. Because we understand that Kannagi’s actions attest to the power of Kannagi’s devotion to her husband

• The Chief Minister himself has written an explanation to the ancient Tamil grammar text “Tholkaappiam”. Will he condescend to ask “At which university did Tholkaappiar learn grammar? Who taught him, he who devised the rules of Tamil grammer, the principles of grammar?”

WE will not. Because we realize that in ages gone by, people lived who were of such scholarly ability that we cannot even dream to match.

• We all know that Thiruvalluvar gave us Thirukkural, one of the great achievements in world literature. Will the Chief Minister deign to question “Where did Thiruvalluvar learn the art of crafting poems? Who taught him the nuances of the Tamil language? From where did he comprehend the philosophy studded in his couplets?

WE will not. Because we realize that Thiruvalluvar was a saint, a scholar whose poetry and philosophy was God-given.

Let it be. Does anyone wonder whether the Chief Minister, who questions the existence of Lord Rama, has ever commented about the beliefs of people of other faiths?

• Does he have anything to say about the Hazrat Bal mosque in Kashmir, which is known to enshrine a hair of Prophet Mohammad? Will the Chief Minister debase himself by asking if it is really belongs / belonged to Prophet Mohammad? Will he ask for proof?

WE will not. Because we know it doesn’t become of a civilized individual to speak ill about the great men held in high esteem by people of different faiths.

• It is known that Jesus Christ died on the cross, but came back to life two days after. Will the Chief Minister dare to ask “Where did Christ conduct research on Resurrection? Or if someone brought Him back to life, where did that person learn this art? Is there a proof for all this?”

WE will not. Because we consider it a savage act to mock at prophets, saints and messengers of God, even if they belong to a religion different from that we follow. Why go such lengths? The Chief Minister himself has gone on record saying that he sports a yellow towel because the Buddha wore a dress of the same colour.

• Will the Chief Minister question this: “What proof exists that the Buddha wore a yellow dress? Where did he dye his dress yellow?”

WE will not. Because we think only fools will pass demeaning comments about great men, who are considered reincarnations of God.

The DMK supremo hastens to cite that even Pandit Nehru once said that the Ramayana is just a tale, and is not real. But how can one consider the views of Nehru, or anyone for that matter, to be the final word on this subject.

Even if one were to think that what Nehru said is like the word of God, it would serve well to know what Nehru once said about the DMK. He called the DMK “nonsense”. For this utterance of his, the DMK staged mass protests condemning Nehru. Why did they do this? The DMK which considers Nehru’s words to be be of sacrosanct nature should have shut shop that same day. After all, Nehru couldn’t be wrong, right? Why persist with what in Nehru’s own words was “nonsense”?

It needs no repetition that the Chief Minister has spoken without applying his mind. But his selective rhetoric is carefully tuned to hurt only Hindus. Because he thinks Hindus are dunderheads. Else how will he stoop to pass remarks about someone who is considered God by millions of Hindus?

The Chief Minister has acted out of the combined conceit, insolence and imperiousness that his money, power and political successes have given him. It is an irony that the power that feeds his arrogance which leads him to demean Lord Rama was given to him by people, three-fourths of whom pray to Him daily.

Will the Chief Minister categorically reject the votes of those who think Rama is God? Will he do his best not to ever solicit their votes? Why wait for him? Let us do it now. We should consider it shameful to vote for this Chief Minister or for any party that seeks to affiliate itself with him.

No related posts.

The only thought that was running through my mind was how my grandparents would have reacted to it. The one word they would have used is “thaanthondri”, which in Tamil, refers to people forgetting their roots and their past, and acting as if they originated all by themselves. Never a good thing.

Opinion might be divided on which channel’s show is better. I think Sun TV’s show is better, but they make it a little unpalatable because of these unwarranted potshots. After all, when you’re good, it shows. So why take the trouble and criticise the others?

No related posts.

Well, everyone is entitled to voice an opinion. But Ms. SenGupta goes rather overboard in trying to prove that the movie isn’t great. Her post reads as if it were a natural reaction to someone who suggested that the Rajnikanth must be awarded an Oscar, or the movie must be conferred with the Palme d’Or. It is a populist movie, and it must please a lot of constituencies (which, going by all reports, it has). Surely then, such a movie cannot please elitists like Ms. SenGupta.

But what really throws one into a fit of anger is this statement:

I remember Rajnikanth from some very forgettable Hindi films of the 80s. Well the news is that he is still there. Stuck in the 80s that is.

What ignorance! How does watching an odd movie or two make anyone an authority on Rajni’s movies? This movie could be bad, even crappy. But Ms. SenGupta, in a fit of idiocy, diverts her criticism (or disappointments) of the movie to a needless assessment of Rajnikanth as an actor. Agreed, thalaivar‘s histrionics might be a few levels lower than Kamal Hassan, but he has nevertheless churned out some excellent performances over the years. One needs to look no further than Mullum Malarum or Aarilirundhu Arupadhu Varai to convince oneself of this fact. (Here is a partial list of other interesting movies starring thalaivar.)

Sivaji’s success can be attributed almost entirely to Rajnikanth; but the nationwide hype that has been generated this time around is partially because Ms. SenGupta’s bosses at CNN-IBN chose to brand the movie a phenomenon. One anchor even went to the extent of saying that Rajnikanth had successfully bridged the North-South divide in India. If Ms. SenGupta feels bad about Rajni making her feel like a pig, then she would do better to train her guns on her news-hungry bosses. And not the BOSS!

No related posts.

Ms. Ram is the daughter of N. Ram, Editor-in-Chief, The Hindu, who is an alumnus of the Columbia University journalism school. She studied at Sishya, Chennai, Oxford University, and the London School of Economics before going to Columbia University. Ms. Ram spent a year teaching English in Harbin, China; interned at The Hindu group’s Frontline magazine in 2001-2002; and subsequently worked at the Hansard Society in London.

What next? Some grandchild passed second standard with flying colours?

No related posts.

* Mark Shields is the Deputy Commissioner of the Jamaican Police, and Chief Investigator in the Bob Woolmer murder case.

No related posts.

Yes, “Hamara Bajaj” had a universal appeal. It was filled with elements that made the scooter seem like a commodity that everyone in the family treasured. For example, observe how the old woman sports a smile. Or the kid jumping on seeing the balloons, with the bike in the background. Or the way the man who cleans it blows at the Bajaj logo before dusting it. In a way, this touching ad typified that age.

The jingle sounded (and still sounds) excellent. It ends with the line…

Buland Bharat ki, Buland tasveer…
Hamara Bajaj! Hamara Bajaj!

And though I don’t know what it means, it made me think that I should own a Bajaj scooter when I grew up. That I ride a Bajaj Caliber was not influenced by this ad though!

No related posts.

In the glorious traditions of Adi Shankara, Ramanuja, Madhvacharya, Raja Rammohan Roy, Swami Vivekananda and Mahatma Gandhi comes Hinduism’s newest reformer — Sagarika Ghose.

Yes, Ms. Ghose, who reads presents news in CNN-IBN, lists down “pondering about Hinduism” as her chief hobby. This spurs her from time to time to present her views on Hinduism, how it has degenerated, how women are being looked down in Hinduism, and how the religion needs a new reformer. Especially, when she runs out of sensational news items, like these Mumbai blasts for example. (For how long can one keep exorcising the spirit of the city?)

And ever since the controversy that has “erupted” in Sabarimala, Ms. Ghose has risen as the unquestioned, undisputed champion of Hinduism. So here are a few questions which I would like to pose to her…

1. Ms. Ghose, what ails you?

2. It is common knowledge that Hindus do not take their religion very seriously. They don’t care as much about their religious sentiments being attacked. In effect, in a debate on religion, Hindus are soft targets. Is this why you choose to harp on Hinduism?

3. I dare you, Ma’am. Why don’t you launch an offensive on the oppression that women in other religions are forced to undergo? You talk about women being denied entry into one single temple. Why not talk about the equality of the genders, as practised in other religions?

4. You seem to buy too easily into the argument that Sabarimala is / was a Buddhist monastery. Why? In your blog, you quote Mr. Sanal Edamaruku of the Indian Rationalist Association. The reason these gentlemen give is that the area surrounding Sabarimala is littered with ancient Buddhist sites, hence this should also be one. There is a saying: “If you jump into a ring with 12 clowns, and start reading Shakespeare, onlookers will think of you as the thirteenth clown!” Ever come across it?

5. Assuming Mr. Edamaruku is correct, how can one possibly explain the Makara jyoti — the sacred light which appears unfailingly every Makara Shankaranti (January 14) amidst the hills opposite the shrine? Which Buddhist monastery in the world has recorded a similar event?

6. Can Mr. Edamaruku and his rational-thinking colleagues explain the flight of the Garuda which sails over the route to guard the cache of jewels that are transported from the palace of the Pandalam king to the shrine, again during Makara Shankaranti?

7. Why do you, Ms. Ghose, restrict the debate on religion to feminism and women’s liberation alone? In fact, you are moving the debate into the zone of reductio ad absurdum. You twist every single argument to give it a feminist angle, and thus kill it. “Religion. Hinduism. Sabarimala. Women not allowed. Inequality. Injustice. Male chauvinism. Let’s change tradition.” That is the progression of the debate. “Reduction to absurdity” was never used more cunningly!

8. You asked one of your invitees, a priest at the Meenakshi Temple in Madurai, “Why are women not allowed inside the garbagriha of the temple?” I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your invitee responded, “But even the Shankaracharya of the Kanchi Mutt is not allowed into the garbagriha!” Is that reason enough to start a men’s liberation movement?

9. Why use such narrow arguments like “Do women pollute the shrine?” Maybe you are using the term, pollution, for want of a better word. But it does not convey the right meaning. My mom doesn’t allow me to loiter around in the house when I’m back from a haircut. I’m barred from the kitchen and the prayer room till I get a bath. Extending your now-famous stump line “Will Lord Ayyappa ever open his doors to women?”, I am going to ask my mom, “Will God ever open his doors to me when I haven’t bathed?” Fair logic, eh?

10. Are traditions meant only to be changed, Ms Ghose? Yes, they are, but only with strong reasons. That conservatives are averse to change, is a wrong opinion. Change, just for the sake of it, is what conservatives are against. The means are just as important. I ask you, Ms. Ghose, what do you wish to achieve by effecting change in Sabarimala? Let us assume that the doors of Lord Ayyappa are indeed opened to women. Will it ensure that women will not have any problems at all? Will all you feminists and pseudo-liberalists be satisfied?

11. If traditions are to be changed, why Ms. Ghose do you begin every newscast with a smile and a greeting? Let me try arguing like you do. “If you wish us ‘Good evening’, is that going to make our evening good? Hence the greeting is a waste of time. If I am in grief, it is going to enrage me. Why stick to values of the Victorian era?” I dare you again, Ms. Ghose, why don’t you try this?

12. There are so many burning issues to address. Your channel has launched a Light-a-Candle campaign to donate to the victims of the Mumbai blasts. Why don’t you take a hard stance on a hard issue? Say, the Israel-Lebanon conflict. Why not start a Light-a-Candle campaign to end this? Why just stay content with taking potshots at soft targets? Why don’t you give us some “real news”? As I noted a few days ago in these same pages, why don’t you just “leave my faith alone?”

No related posts.

1. The Kannada actress who has confessed that she touched the idol of the deity claims to have been pushed in by the crowd. I find this not credible. I have been to Sabarimala a few times. The innermost prakaaram has a very small entrance, not very high. Even the pujaris enter with caution. Second, there is a gap of at least 20 feet where the crowd — the first-est row — is cut off. Such a statement would have had takers if this had happened in say, Tirupati, where the prakaaram is cut off only by a human chain, and there is no entry door.

2. I fail to understand the “loss of divinity” angle. Who is man to define limits to the power of God? The same Mr. Panikkar drew much ire in Tamil Nadu when it was rumoured that he suggested that the idol of Lord Muruga at Palani be removed and a replica made of some other material be installed instead. The act was done, only to be reverted very soon. Playing foul with God?

3. The Government in Kerala stokes religious tensions from time to time by appointing women in administrative positions in Sabarimala. Why would anyone want to do so given that it can be unpalatable for many? Why not appoint men, at least in such positions?

4. The media has been hyping up the whole thing, and has given a most unwarranted feminist twist to the story. Sagarika Ghose asked on CNN-IBN, “Should faith be restricted to men alone?” Ms Ghose needs to undergo a course which teaches respect for traditions. I do not intend to begin another flame-war, but do men ever repent, “Oh, what treachery! Can we not bear babies too?” Yes, Ma’m, everyone is equal in the eyes of God, but let us also learn to realise that if a tradition has been put in place, it exists for some reason. Of course, Indian society has done with away quite a few “evil” practices, sati, for example. The customs and practices surrounding faith are better left alone. Especially in a state like Kerala where such customs are followed rather fanatically.

5. One of the guests on the same CNN-IBN show radiated ignorance by claiming that the reason women were not allowed in Sabarimala was that they cannot make the arduous journey. Pray tell me, how is a woman of 60 better placed than a 25-year old to handle the ardour?

6. Another angle thrown in by some self-confessed experts is that Sabarimala was a Buddhist monastery, which was later converted into a Hindu shrine, hence the restriction for women. These armchair theorists hold the same view about every single Hindu holy shrine. The Wikipedia article on Tirumala (Tirupati) states:

While some scholars accept the antiquity of the shrine they believe that the image of Venkateswara was not originally that of Vishnu but of a Buddhist deity, perhaps bodhisattva avalokiteswara. The region of Andhra in which Tirupati is located in was already known for the existence of ancient Buddhist sites of the Satavahana era, namely Nagarjunakonda and Amravati, thus scholars suggest that the ancient site of Tirupati was probably a Buddhist site prior to its transformation into a Hindu one after Buddhism saw its decline in the face of Guptan Hindu Rennaissance. Even up to the time of Ramanuja, the famous Vaishnava scholar of the 12th century, the identity of the deity was still disputed until Ramanuja confirmed it to be Vishnu.

There are also some who hold the view that Mecca is a Hindu shrine, which I find to be equally ridiculous. The study of history with the sole aim of disturbing social harmony is detestable.

It is the hobby of some to breathe new life into controversies surrounding religion and faith. They do not understand (or they understand it too well) that religion whips up people’s emotions. And the newsmen simple love it, they have a field day!

I’m reminded of the following lines from Leon Uris’ Exodus:

Ari Ben Canaan put the Bible down. “The gentleman of Whitehall had better study their claims further. I say the same thing to the Foreign Minister that a great man said to another oppressor three thousand years ago — LET MY PEOPLE GO.”

Leave my faith alone!

No related posts.

… except for the HDFC Standard Life Insurance advertisement, which should rank as among the most insensitive ever to appear on Indian television. You couldn’t have missed this one. An old man isst about to get down from the train, and his son proffers his hand in aid. The old man frowns at his son, and alights on his own.

We are to assume that this depicts the old man’s self-respect and self-reliance. Which is fine. But isn’t there a better way to depict this? Should it be done in such a cheap and demeaning way? What of family values? A son wants to help his father alight from a train — how can it affect the old man’s self-respect? It is a simple act of caring for elders, a value ingrained into Indian society (and any society, in general).

The ad seems to mock at this value. It tells us, “No self-respecting father will ever take his son’s help to get down from a train.” What utter nonsense!

Express yourself

The ads for Airtel Prepaid which extol the advantages of instalments are pathetic. One shows a peon advising a guy loaded with work to sift through one file at a time. Another depicts a stranger informing a guy to gift a costly necklace to his girlfriend pearl by pearl.

In contrast, the longer Airtel ad is splendidly done. All of Airtel’s ads (the sensible ones) have a single theme — “the power of human expression”. And this ad shows it better than any other.

It starts with a shot of the Quit India Movement: “Two words can bring down an empire”. Then it cuts to Martin Luther King Jr’s famous “I have a dream speech”. Caption: “One dream can change the world.” The next frame shows David Shepherd giving Tendulkar out, followed by the obvious caption: “One raised finger can break a billion hearts.” This is followed by an image of Winston Churchill addressing a huge gathering during the War. The caption continues from the previous image “… and two can win a war!”

The images that follow are of the Dalai Lama (“a whisper can inspire hope”), Mother Teresa (“one touch can instill faith”), Lata Mangeshkar (“some voices can move a nation”), Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan (“yet some others can dissolve boundaries”), the demolition of the Berlin Wall (“one act of defiance can spark a revolution”) and finally, a army of people holding candles (“one hundred thousand candles can end a war”). The AR Rahman-composed Airtel tune is sounded like an anthem, as the words “That is the power of human expression” appear.

Whereas some might question the ethics behind the use of emotionally-charged images to convey a business theme, one cannot deny that the ad is a masterpiece in its ability to communicate a simple idea in a simple manner — black-and-white images, no sound effects, and no cavalier themes. This ad is a treat!

No related posts.