E D I T O R I A L   P A G E

EDITORIALS

Now, a petrol shock 
PETROLEUM price is soaring and the central government is wringing its hands unclear how to respond. Should it pass on the burden to the consumer and provoke a howl of nationwide protest and much worse in the five states going to the polls next year? 

 

OPINION

THE MEDIA AND SOCIETY
Dangers of playing up trivia
by Praful Bidwai
THE untimely death of Arvind Narain Das at 52 is an appropriate occasion to pause and reflect on the state of the Indian media, especially the Press. What makes this particularly timely is a sour irony: the newspaper which gave Das his first job as a writer didn’t carry the news of his death or the long condolence message by Prime Minister Vajpayee. 

MIDDLE

POINT OF LAW

 

DIVERSITIES — DELHI LETTER

Sweating VIPs at I-Day reception
by Humra Quraishi
WHERE do I begin? Maybe, with the Independence Day reception hosted by the President of India, Mr K.R. Narayanan, and First Lady Usha Narayanan. It was a hot, humid evening and the lawns were crammed with the who’s who and foreign diplomats. Unprecedented security all the way, and unlike the previous year this time the reception was hosted not in the two halls but on the Rashtrapati Bhavan lawns itself. 

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

Now, a petrol shock 

PETROLEUM price is soaring and the central government is wringing its hands unclear how to respond. Should it pass on the burden to the consumer and provoke a howl of nationwide protest and much worse in the five states going to the polls next year? It is a frightening thought and the government does not have the political stamina to take the plunge. So, Petroleum Minister Ram Naik rules out a corresponding increase in prices, saying he is watching the situation. He also makes a valiant attempt to keep the price stable but reduce the loss to the government by importing crude at a higher price and selling petroleum products at a lower price. (If both prices remain the same until March next the total burden will rise to Rs 17,000 crore; this is the so-called oil pool deficit.) He wants the Finance Ministry to slash the import duty from the present 30 per cent and the state government to cut sales tax which is as high as 33 per cent at some places. He thinks the Ministry is extracting double benefit: high prices mean higher import duty collection and a cheaper rupee adds to the landed cost of crude oil and produces the same effect. This, the officials of the Petroleum Ministry feel, is plain greed and there is no justification for the government to earn more import duty than budgeted for. The Finance Ministry will have none of it. Since it has not caused the steep hike in crude prices, it is entitled to enjoy the unexpected windfall! After all, it did not protest when crude price crashed dragging the custom duty collection with it. Strangely enough, there had been no discussion either between the officials of the two Ministries or the Ministers themselves. They are talking at each other through the Press. And the remarks are getting sharper.

If the present trend continues in the world crude market, the government has to inevitably raise the domestic price. Or, be prepared to subsidise the sale to the extent of Rs 17,000 crore. (Mr Yashwant Sinha knows this but expects a mini miracle to cushion the blow.) As it happened in June last, a downward trend in crude price may be purely temporary and the Dubai crude which India buys will bounce back to $28-29 a barrel. The hope is that at its meeting on September 10, OPEC will decide to pump out an additional 500,000 barrels every day. It has a binding commitment to push up production if the average price of seven grades of crude breaches the $22-28 a barrel band for 20 continuous days. It is still fractionally lower now but many believe that OPEC will honour the old commitment. But that will not necessarily cool the market. Saudi Arabia announced that it would on its own pump out half a million barrels a day but nobody knows if it has really done so. Obviously it has not, if the market reaction is any indication. Also, the crude stock in the USA, the biggest consumer of petroleum products, is very low, many refineries there will remain closed for maintenance in October and then it will be winter when demand goes up. Additionally, there are hawks in OPEC like Iran and Venezuela which clamour for extra revenue by keeping the price high. All this spells a higher price over the short term and warrants a well-considered and viable policy response by the government. If it aligns the domestic price with import cost in one go, there will be bedlam in all but the petrol market. If it does not, budgeting will go haywire. Nobody will envy the government.

Hurriyat’s Kashmir formula

EVER since the Hizbul Mujahideen's surprise offer and abrupt termination of the unilateral ceasfire in Jammu and Kashmir for finding a solution, through dialogue, to the Kashmir issue, developments in the valley continue to attract greater attention. What is significant is the speed at which they are taking place. Before the full import of one development can sink in it is replaced by another equally crucial one. There is a valid reason why the experts on Kashmir have lost count of their journey from despair to hope and back. Never before have Kashmir-related developments moved at breakneck speed as they have in the past two months. It is only natural that when action becomes rapid, the picture tends to become hazy. The killing of six Hindu villagers last week by Pakistani militants in Rajouri, the tenth such incident during the month, was, of course, part of the old blood-dripping script introduced over a decade ago. However, there is a lot which is happening outside the militant-infested valley which deserves close scrutiny. To make sense of the developments on the Kashmir front, the speed of the "projector" may need to be adjusted for imparting clarity and sharpness to the fast moving pictures. The public announcement of the Centre's willingness to hold talks with the All-Party Hurriyat Conference could be considered as the beginning of the current phase of hope and despair, depending on which side one is backing. The spotlight is once again on the Hurriyat with the images of Chief Minister Farooq Abdullah holding the autonomy flag and the Mujahideen, making a rare appearance without guns and grenades, holding the white flag of truce receding into the background. But to get a hang of the unfolding story each frame and every shot should be analysed separately and with care. A brief recap of the story thus far, before moving on, would show the camera focusing on the Hurriyat, Dr Farooq Abdullah, the Hizbul Mujahideen and the Hurriyat again, in that order. The shootout between the Mujahideen and the Lashkar-e-Toiyaba gave a new twist to the story. The rumours about a likely split in the Hizb's ranks may also turn out to be true. The process may already have begun. Mr Fazal Haq Qureshi, counted a moderate by the bloody Mujahideen standards, was severely reprimanded by the Pakistan-based chief of the militant outfit. His fault? He went public with his assessment that a fresh round of talks was possible between the Hizb and India.

All these developments must not be lost sight of while studying what appears to be a brand new formula floated by the Hurriyat chief, Prof Abdul Ghani Bhat, for finding a durable solution to the Kashmir issue. Since the negotiations for getting the dialogue process going between the Mujahideen and New Delhi broke down because of differences over inviting Pakistan to the table, the Hurriyat formula appears to be workable. It may find favour with those who are serious about forging a relationship of respect and friendship between India and Pakistan, which is not possible without a happy end to the Kashmir story. Professor Bhat has offered to break the seven-member Hurriyat into two groups of three and four members. While the larger group would hold talks with India, the smaller one would hold "parallel discussions" with Pakistan. The agenda for the Hurriyat's talks with India and Pakistan separately would presumably be common, otherwise the purpose of such an initiative may be defeated. The sceptics may have a different assessment. They may see the Hurriyat wanting to play the role of not one but two monkeys for settling the dispute over the sharing of bread between the two proverbial cats. Since India badly singed its hand of friendship while accepting the Hizb's offer of dialogue, it should weigh the pros and cons of the Hurriyat's latest initiative with care before showing its hand. It should wait for the Pakistani cat to say a welcome mew to the Hurriyat's offer before going public with its purr. 

THE MEDIA AND SOCIETY
Dangers of playing up trivia
by Praful Bidwai

THE untimely death of Arvind Narain Das at 52 is an appropriate occasion to pause and reflect on the state of the Indian media, especially the Press. What makes this particularly timely is a sour irony: the newspaper which gave Das his first job as a writer didn’t carry the news of his death or the long condolence message by Prime Minister Vajpayee. This irony is part of a greater paradox that marks the Indian media today in its choice of what is considered relevant or newsworthy, and how stories and analyses are either highlighted or censored. It is also an eloquent comment on the place of journalists within many of our media organisations.

Even a cursory glance at India’s “national” newspapers and magazines should convince one that they are in the grip of a new kind of frivolous, garbage-promoting journalism. This paradigm is shockingly insensitive to what is of real concern to flesh-and-blood people, especially the vast majority of the poor, and perversely partially to the glitterati and the chattering classes. Big newspapers vie with one another not to break stories, investigate and expose what is wrong with our society and politics, or carry penetrating analyses of our reality, but to glamourise, titillate and trivialise. For some of them, the top priority is not news or analysis, but their tawdry colour supplements which voyeuristically peep into the lives of the super-hedonistic metropolitan elite that constitutes less than one-thousandth of our population.

Over the past few years, there has been a conscious “dumbing down” of the media, a deliberate attempt to play down what is relevant and serious, and play up what is trivial but tackily fashionable, Thus, Miss World stories replete with mindless quotes from dumb models are given higher priority than reports on victims of cyclones. A cruel 40 per cent increase in ration-shop food prices merits marginal attention in relation to “feel-good” reports on rich millionaires’ exploits abroad. Wars are glamourised and turned into spectacles (witness Kargil) while the struggle of millions for survival is pushed into obscure spaces.

Through most of our magazines, you wouldn’t know that more than 60 per cent Indians survive on less than one dollar a day, that our health services have nearly collapsed, or that poverty levels have significantly risen in the past decade despite 6 per cent growth. Nor would you be able to divine that information technology “Superpower” India only commands 0.7 per cent of the global market in computer software, or that HIV-AIDS is spreading here twice as fast as in the rest of the world.

Equally distressingly, the media shows less and less discriminating or balanced judgement while separating bold and forthright reporting from pure hate speech. Intemperate attacks on religious minorities or Shiv Sena threats to kill non-conformists are treated on a par with genuinely secular appeals for tolerance. Headlines in most papers show strong biases: telecom “liberated” (i.e. privatised, with harmful consequences for network expansion), and imports of 1,400 items “freed” (when reckless and unregulated agricultural imports could ruin millions of livelihoods). Another example is: India “conquers” Pakistan in cricket, or “thrashes” Sri Lanka, but is only “defeated” by X or Y. What takes the cake, of course, is the memorable headline: “India, Beauty Superpower, wins the Miss Universe crown”. This is when India’s women have worse malnutrition levels than women in sub-Saharan Africa — after a whole decade of economic collapse, war and famine. What matters is not the truth, not facts, but the “feel-good” factor, the daily steroid the elite so desperately needs.

As part of this dumbing down, many newspapers have sharply cut serious international coverage (now largely reduced to the USA, the UK, Pakistan and NRIs). The overwhelming “India angle” here narrows down everything. Through our Press, you would never guess that there is 10 per cent-plus unemployment in the European Union or economic stagnation in Japan. Most publications have reduced economic journalism to mere corporate reporting, much of it breathlessly uncritical. Their coverage of science, health and the environment has declined in quality and quantity. The space for comment and analysis has considerably shrunk. Reviews of books, arts, music and the theatre —in which quality papers take legitimate pride the world over — are disappearing from Indian dailies.

This has nothing to do with economics. Indeed, our biggest newspapers have never been affluent than they are today. Some of the richest among them earn profits of $100 million or more — the same level as the top papers in the West. But a peculiar kind of competition is afflicting many, thanks to predatory pricing. This means only the top two or three papers can survive in each big city. The others lose. This can only undermine plurality and variety.

True, there are exceptions to this trend. But the dominant paradigm is “Murdochisation” — the violent reshaping of media institutions in the fashion typical of Rupert Murdoch although without him. Murdochisation involves the destruction of the media as a responsible institution which disseminates information and responsibly promotes debate. It means obliterating the distinction between the editorial and business functions of a publication. Murdoch has taken over numerous quality newspapers and turned them all into cheap tabloids: nude women on page three, and fabricated news stories elsewhere....

Three tendencies mark the “Murdochisation without Murdoch” phenomenon in progress in India under our own Press barons. First, the total subordination of the editorial process under the management, and loss of editorial independence undermine both the freedom of expression and thoughtful, wise editorial judgement. They spell blatant censorship of a kind that the worst of dictators might hesitate to enforce. For instance, Murdoch cut off the whole BBC transmission to China via his satellite because it was critical of the Beijing regime and spoiled his market. Similarly, some of our own papers tried their best to suppress and play down the Srikrishna Commission report and its indictment of the Shiv Sena.

A second ingredient of Murdochisation is complete contempt for truthfulness and honesty. To quote a commentator: “Mudoch thought it was a great idea to publish Hitler’s fake diaries, though he had been warned they were phony. When the hoax was exposed, he shrugged it off, saying, ‘After all, we are in the entertainment business’....” One of Murdoch’s papers long carried on an irresponsible anti-science campaign, questioning the existence of an AIDS epidemic in Africa. Our own Murdochs too have no use for morality or decency.

Murdochisation’s third component is promotion of hard right-wing agendas a la Margaret Thatcher. Translated into the Indian case, this takes the form of promoting Hindutva, Pakistan-bashing and virulent nationalism. A new kind of hate journalism has now sprung up in some magazines which maligns all decent, human and secular causes. Human rights advocates, feminists, secularists or Dalit activists are all branded as jholawalas, hopeless romantics, and “Subaltern Sartres” with “termites in (the) spine and fungus in (the) brain.” When such slander takes over, abuse replaces argument. Reasoning goes out of the window. Maliciously mindless one-liners substitute for analysis.

This dangerous trend must be resisted. Or else our media will lose its relevance. In the last analysis, it is only because the Press plays the function of a witness or chronicler, a forum of debate, and at times a whistle-blower, that it enjoys public respect and credibility. Over the years our media has attracted different kinds of talent and expertise. The “magazine revolution” of the post-Emergency period and the efflorescence of investigative journalism subsequently drew in a lot of idealists and activist-minded journalists. The 1980s also saw the entry of academics and scholars. Arvind Das belonged to this category. He enriched our understanding of Indian society, particularly Bihar, on which he wrote brilliantly.

Das was not just intellectually gifted. He also brought with him the asset of a strong left-wing background: Naxalism of the late 1960s, which exercised a magnetic influence on the cream of Indian youth. It was no coincidence that Das was a topper and President of the St Stephen’s College Students Union. Das was trained as a historian and could easily have flourished as one. He came to the media more out of a sense of mission than for wanting a job. As someone who introduced him to The Times of India, I can testify to this.

Das went (not too successfully) into television — largely driven out from that newspaper by negative internal changes. His death represents a loss to serious journalism dedicated to progressive causes such as social justice and secularism. It also underscores the need to defend that tradition of journalism and reaffirm its relevance today. In the last analysis, journalism can sustain its claim to being something like a noble profession only to the extent that newspapers don’t get reduced to just another commodity in the marketplace, but convey positive values, and provide space for purposive news-gathering, serious analysis and thoughtful comment on the issues of the day. The media can’t enrich itself by keeping the public information-and-knowledge-poor.

Ban all bandhs & save the nation
by Rahul Singh

THERE must be a bandh on bandhs. The recent massacre of some 100 innocent pilgrims near the holy shrine of Amarnath and of civilians in other places in Kashmir is a terrible tragedy, a dastardly act by the terrorists. Yes, there can be no doubt about that. All decent people condemn the killings.

Some demented extremist groups in the state are clearly determined to stall the peace process which has just got under way and a Pakistani hand is probably behind the move. But why declare a nation-wide bandh, as the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), a part of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) parivar, did? What does that achieve? Absolutely nothing.

On the contrary, it leads to a huge national loss and disruption in the public’s day-to-day life. People cannot go to work, children can’t attend school and college, business and trade suffer, tourists and travellers are left stranded at airports and railway stations. Visitors and investors start thinking twice about holidaying or investing in a country which shuts down repeatedly on various pretexts.

Tourists don’t want to have their vacation spoilt by wasting a precious day twiddling their thumbs or desperately trying to get some form of transport and investors don’t want to put money in a country where there is an absence of a work culture. I would go to the extent of saying that bandhs are an unpatriotic act and parties that issue calls for bandhs are not serving the national interest.

Bandhs harm the country in all sorts of ways. They also make us a laughing stock in the rest of the world. I am sure that if a referendum was taken all over the country and one simple question asked, “Do you support bandhs?”, the result would be an overwhelming “No”. The only dissenters would be some professional politicians and anti-social elements, for whom agitation and disruption are more important than the welfare of the country.

So, why do Indian political parties — and they are all just as guilty, from the Congress, to the communists, to the Shiv Sena, to the BJP — announce bandhs? Not because they are angry and indignant when a tragedy takes place, but to show their strength. That’s the main reason. Bandhs are nothing but cynical power plays.

“Look how strong we are,” these parties are saying, in effect. “We can close down everything when we want to.” Bandhs also give an opportunity to goondas to show their muscle. Vehicles that dare to defy the bandh — even if it is to take a patient to a hospital — are stoned and burnt and shops and other establishments that keep open do so at their peril. Criminals are given respectability during bandhs.

The recent nation-wide bandh did not have the support of the Shiv Sena, which had already had its own bandh recently in Mumbai when Mr Thackeray was due to be arrested. The Shiv Sena had shown its strength then. Now, by not supporting the bandh, it wanted to show its power in a different way, by telling the public that it could continue normal life. However, the result was a semi-bandh in some parts of the city and a total bandh in others, where the BJP is stronger. Can there be clearer proof that bandhs are nothing other than power games being played by political parties, at the public’s expense?

In Colaba, in south Mumbai, where I reside, all the shops and markets were closed, but buses and taxis were running. My nationalised bank was open but the post office shut. Why one should be open and the other closed beats me. But I was told that in some of the suburbs, there was a complete shutdown and that even some trains had been cancelled.

I have no problem in getting some food, as I can easily walk to a nearby hotel. But what about the poor, who have to feed themselves and their children and depend entirely on the provision stores and the markets? They are the ones who suffer the most. Bandhs hit the poor much harder than the middle class.

What is the solution? A complete ban on bandhs. Nothing less. I also have a corollary. No holiday should be declared on any pretext whatsoever, whether it is somebody’s death, however, important or revered, or a victory, such as on the battlefield or in sports. Mourning and victories don’t require stoppage of work. If we are to be taken more seriously as a nation, we need to show that we are a hard-working people.

My favourite story — a true one, incidentally — in this particular context relates to Switzerland. One of the Swiss cantons was celebrating its 500th anniversary. The central Swiss government told the canton authorities, “Go ahead and declare a public holiday in your canton,” or words to that effect. No, thank you, came the reply from the canton, we would prefer to continue working during the day and only celebrate after working hours.

Now you know why Swiss have the highest per capita income in the world and we one of the lowest. 

Grime and glamour of writing
by I. M. Soni

PENURY is the wages of the pen, goes a highly accurate but little-known saying. That is why many brash, bold and balding aspirants want to join the so-called glamorous but hapless tribe of penpushers called freelance writers.

Most of these are blissfully unaware that writing is a zealous mistress who bestows more frowns than favours on her “loony” lovers. Barring a few (with heart of steel and skin of a rhino). Others either fall by the wayside or undergo the privations of a glamorous unemployment. They are like out-of-work actors.

They are also unmindful of the stabs in the chest that await them in the shape of rejection-slips. They may or may not concede that they want to write for the sake of money in it. They think that writers roll in what the French call filthy lucre.

Sooner or later, however, they realise that the “way to hell is paved with good intentions”. If they stubbornly continue wooing the fickle Muse, they have to put the quart before the hearse as I did!

The unpleasant fact is that there is a yawning gap between grime and glamour of this world, and the imaginary rainbows at the end of which are no gold pots.

I say it from experience because I have suffered blows for nearly 34 years, having broken into print in February, 1965.

Printed word has a strong glamorous appeal. No wonder, I had nursed the idea of seeing my name in print much earlier than 1965. Two eminent editors added spurs to my feverish imagination — the late Mr Baburao Patel, Editor of “Filmindia,” and the late Mr Prem Bhatia.

A “friendship” developed with Mr Baburao. After his death, his wife, Dr Sushila Rani, sent me 14 volumes of “Filmindia”, when I had asked for only one copy.

Not many readers of The Tribune may know that I started writing “middles” on the suggestion of Mr Prem Bhatia.

For two years, I had slogged at my Smith-Corona with a single finger. The hard-boiled editors rightly frowned at my frilly follies. Some busy ones did not have the time (read courtesy) to detach the covering letter from the article.

But having the tenacity of the crab and the stamina of a pest, I persisted and pestered them. Then came the break, breaking the chain of unwelcome rejection slips. Like Oliver Goldsmith, I felt like buying a “lyre” with my “fat” remuneration and wander about the city, announcing my triumph.

All this is changed now. In the dusk of my life, I look back and ruminate. There is a tinge of regret but the memory of the rewards and decent people in newspapers blots it out.

I have now touched the five-figure mark in remuneration simply because I have a couple of regular columns in some newspapers and magazines which pay me well. This came about only five years ago.

Five years of “prosperity” and 30 of “penury!”. Has it been worthwhile? Yes. Because success does not mean making money; it means becoming what you want to.

Not exactly a Bill of right!
by Anupam Gupta

“I DON'T think that the government would share the impression that a person who is the former Chief Justice of India and has two former Judges of the Supreme Court and two other eminent persons as his colleagues (in the NHRC) has no right even to say what he thinks of this Bill. You may or may not agree. You may or may not accept it. We never said that we are the only ones who are right.”

Thus spake the former Chief Justice of India and Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Justice J.S. Verma, to Frontline magazine in its latest August 18 issue. He was explaining the NHRC’s unprecedented suo motu action in condemning the proposed Prevention of Terrorism (PoT) Bill, 2000 drafted by the Law Commission on a reference made by the Government of India.

No less important than Justice Verma’s reversal of position on the issue — first supporting the Bill in December, 1999, at a Law Commission seminar and then opposing it through the NHRC in July, 2000 — highlighted in this column last week, is the question of the NHRC’s jurisdictional competence to express its opinion on a law even before it is enacted.

Since the NHRC head has, in his interview to Frontline quoted above, chosen to invoke his own stature as a former CJI, and the stature of two of his colleagues as former Judges of the Supreme Court, in support of the NHRC’s right to comment on the Bill, it may not be impertinent on my part to ask: does even the Supreme Court have the right to speak out on, or speak against, a Bill that has yet to be taken up by Parliament or is still pending before it?

However wide or unfettered it might otherwise be, the power of judicial review vested by the Constitution in the higher judiciary does not extend to judges anticipating legislation and seeking to abort it, as it were, by premature action, comment or observation. In court or out of it.

Any other view of the matter would turn the principle of separation of powers inside out. Whether in India, where the Constitution is supreme, or in England where Parliament is. And whether in England or India, it is not a question of separation of powers alone. It is a question of judicial propriety as well.

“It is perfectly legitimate,” the head of the English judiciary, Lord Chancellor Hailsham said in February, 1985, “for the judiciary to criticise the state of the law as it is and to draw the attention of Parliament (to it) in order that it may be improved.... (But) It is utterly improper for a Court of Appeal judge or any other judge speaking on the Bench to criticise matters passing through Parliament.”

He had, said Lord Hailsham, received letters of apology from two members of the Court of Appeal, who had earlier criticised the Administration of Justice Bill moved by the British government and pending before Parliament. “They should never have said what they said from the Bench, and they both have apologised to me.”

The highest court in England below the House of Lords, the Court of Appeal occupies a position in that country that would lie midway between the Supreme Court and the High Courts in India. The judges in question, publicly rebuked by the Lord Chancellor for overstepping their jurisdiction and compelled to apologise, were Lord Justice Ackner and Lord Justice Purchas.

Had Justice Verma, then, and the two other former judges on the NHRC commented adversely on the PoT Bill, or any other proposed or pending Bill, some years ago while they were still on the Supreme Court, they would, without doubt, have created a major problem for themselves.

How can the situation improve to their advantage as members of the NHRC, a body legally subordinate and institutionally inferior to the Supreme Court?

Nor can Justice Verma, or any of his colleagues on the NHRC, claim a right simply to “say what he thinks of this Bill”, as he told Frontline, so long as he or any of them remain members of the NHRC and not ordinary citizens. Unless and until the PoT Bill is enacted by Parliament into law and enforced and any complaint of violation of human rights thereunder comes up before the NHRC. Or is taken up by it suo motu under Section 12 of its founding charter, the Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993.

But suo motu opposition by the NHRC to a legislative proposal which is not yet law is an attempt or exercise at political decision-making totally alien to the judicial function.

No amount of criticism, however, would convince Justice Verma that he or his colleagues on the NHRC have done anything wrong.

“What hurts me most,” he told Frontline in conclusion, “is anyone thinking that it is not our function. Whenever any law is enacted, it is widely circulated for eliciting opinion, before legislation. It is part of the democratic process and debate in Parliament. Opinions are solicited. In our case, we had to secure a copy of the Law Commission’s report on the Bill through a lawyer friend.”

It is difficult to make out the exact factors at work here. Institutional envy for the Law Commission (also headed by a retired Supreme Court judge), a feeling of being left out or neglected, a desire to make one’s presence felt on an important issue, or a burning uncontrollable commitment to democracy and human rights.

A bit of everything perhaps.

Sweating VIPs at I-Day reception
by Humra Quraishi

WHERE do I begin? Maybe, with the Independence Day reception hosted by the President of India, Mr K.R. Narayanan, and First Lady Usha Narayanan. It was a hot, humid evening and the lawns were crammed with the who’s who and foreign diplomats. Unprecedented security all the way, and unlike the previous year this time the reception was hosted not in the two halls but on the Rashtrapati Bhavan lawns itself. What everyone missed were ‘pankhas’ (fans) because the heat was getting unbearable. As one foreign diplomat commented “We have to wear a formal suit and with that it gets worse.....”. The Indians in their ‘bandgalas’ were seen fanning themselves with the invite cards . Some of the more sensible ones were wearing cotton shervanis and cotton collared kurtas and were looking more at ease. Hope this dress infection catches on for with our climatic conditions there’s nothing to beat good old cotton.

Don’t know why there’s a separate enclosure for the VVIPs, who sit in a cordoned-off area, whilst others stand around and view them as if they were prize caged possessions. That particular evening all eyes seemed to be on Prime Minister Atal Behari Vajpayee, especially after the news that the same morning it was apparent that he showed some problem walking.

But in the evening he seemed to walk without any support, albeit a little slowly and cautiously.

German festival

Moving ahead, one of the major events to take place here will be the German festival in India — 2000-2001. The festival of India in Germany took place in 1991-92 and now, after a decade, the reciprocal festival is taking place here, from October, 2000, to March, 2001. It will be inaugurated by the Presidents of the two countries, Johannes Rau and K R Narayanan, on September 30, 2000, in New Delhi. And over 40 programmes will be presented in 27 of our major cities. Needless to add that the focus will be on theatre, visual arts, philosophy, literature, architecture, entertainment but if you want to get further details of the itinerary of this festival then you could get in touch with Max Mueller Bhavans in the country (Delhi’s branch is at Kasturba Gandhi Marg) or on http://www.goethe. de/india-festival

Brunner goes even further

In one of my last columns I had mentioned about the 90-year-old Hungarian artist, Elizabeth Brunner, who’d lived here through the past seven decades. Though confined to the wheel chair but even in that state has managed to present one exhibition after another and now this latest gesture from her. About two years back, a group of Shantiniketan-based artists presented her with a palash tree and Brunner not only nurtured it but when the sapling grew considerably she even expressed the desire to plant it in the Hungarian Embassy premises. And on August 18 in a brief though touching ceremony she did exactly this. Guests included Karan Singh, several artists and diplomats. I don’t know what we presented her with on her 90th birthday (July 1) but this could be termed as a gift from her to us, the people of this country.

Israeli Embassy into theatre

The Israeli Embassy’s cultural section is at its active best. And the latest production they will be staging is the award winning play —‘Dancing With Dad’, which has already been staged over 800 times the world over and recently it bagged the first prize in the 2000 Belgrade Festival. The story revolves around the relationship between a father and his mentally challenged son and it is told ‘‘through the eyes of the boy who recalls and reflects on his childhood memories through a stream of consciousness...the painful, courageous and yet sometimes even humorous relationship between the two is portrayed brilliantly by Itzick Weingarten....’’

This moving play will be staged in New Delhi, at the Siri Fort auditorium. Thereafter it will be presented to audiences in Goa, Chennai and Mumbai.

Two UN ‘days’ passed by

Two UN days have just passed by — International Youth Day on August 12 and the International Day of the Indigenous People on August 9. And passed by rather unnoticed, except for those typical messages of UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.

It seems hypocrisy is on the decline for on this International Youth Day speeches from political men were at their lowest. And needless to add, the condition of our youth is not at its satisfactory best. Forget about the rest of the details — poor educational facilities, distractions on the television, lack of job avenues — the latest worrying aspect could be the rising number of male prostitutes in the capital city. Few months back I met young woman photographer Anita Khemka, who has focused on this aspect alone. Though she has not come up with exact figures but she says there are some hundreds of male prostitutes in the city. ‘‘Most of them are in their teens and are earning their living by selling their bodies ..... clients are rich men, many a time even foreigners and have these boys picked up, to be taken to exclusive places’’.

SPIRITUAL NUGGETS

As the bud unfolds into the flower, so the soul unfolds through experience into the clear white light within.

— Satguru Sivaya Subramuniyaswami, Hinduism Today, July 1999

***

For as he thinketh in his heart so is he.

— The Bible: Proverbs, 23:7

***

In so far as the mind is stronger than the body, so are the ills contracted by the mind more severe than those contracted by the body.

— Cicero, Philippies, XI, 4

***

Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.

— I Thessalonians 5:21

***

When in doubt tell the truth

— Mark Twain, Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar, II

***

What is most difficult to perform in the world?

To follow the path of Dharma.

What is a true friend in the world?

One's own good deeds.

What is true worship?

True worship is that in which there is no self interest.

Who is without enemies?

One who always desires the welfare of others.

What is virtue?

To relieve suffering of others.

What is the essence of human life?

To search for the Supreme spirit.

What is more painful than death?

Not to give thought to one's ignorance.

Who is dead even while alive?

One who is selfish.

What is the shakti of God?

It is the one which gives joy to the entire universe.

What is dharma?

It is one which gives true happiness.

What is knowledge?

It is one which always shows the light.

Which is the greatest sin?

To hurt others.

What is pride?

To think one is the doer.

How is desire born?

From the feeling of a deficiency.

How can one be free of desire?

By meeting the Supreme Lord.

What is diseased?

One who eats without limit.

— From Shri Samata Vilas