Friday, 2 July 2021

Look, Who’s Clean: Hygiene, India and the West

 

            Look, Who’s Clean: Hygiene, India and the West

                                             Jawhar Sircar

                            New Indian Express, 4th Feb 2021

 

 

         What the British found quite disgusting during their long uninvited stay in India was that Indians defecated in open fields, squatting. The Western world picked up and echoed this narrative and these toilet practices were painted as decisively inferior. A massive Swachh Bharat mission has now been launched on a war footing and by this year its target is to make India free of this archaic custom of open defection — which has to go, as it is anachronistic.

 

          To appreciate our old toilet customs, we may dabble a bit with history and geography. What lay at their root was the Indian obsession with avoiding ‘pollution’ and ‘impurities’, the worst were (and are) faeces of humans, including one’s own. Therefore, the farther away from home that one disposed human excreta the better it was. This meant defecating in the open, which was considered a very desirable cultural habit. Using water to clean oneself thereafter was/is non negotiable and several classes insisted on a complete bath after the unclean act was over and also changing into fresh clothes. Till a few decades ago, relatives from villages would be horrified to see how toilets were not far but attached to urban homes, where everyone used the same ‘spot’. So pronounced was the revulsion of rural guests that they would often insist on venturing out for toilet.

 

         As MN Srinivas has stated ‘purity’ and ‘pollution’ constitute  the very principles on which Hinduism rests. In fact, Sanskritisation insists, among other essentials, on the strict observance of standards of bodily and social hygiene. Any culture that did not use water so passionately and did not practice such all encompassing ritual purity was branded as barbarian or mleccha. Contact with them was quite unpardonable.

 

           Most western civilisations had, however, no such fixation with touch/cleanliness or water/washing — even when they had access to clean water. Their forbidding cold was not the only determinant, and Europeans (and their white colonial cousins) had completely different attitudes to cleanliness and water per se. This often rested on the scarcest of its use. Bathing was rare and inner garments were often stitched on to bodies, for months. This explains why flowers, perfumes and aromatics were always in great demand. Human excreta was never liked anywhere, but it did not meet with the same loathing as in India. Though some classes occasionally used improvised soapy materials, regular washing of hands was considered unnecessary there. Thus, when surgeon and obstetrician, Ignaz Semmelweis, suggested in 1847 that doctors in Vienna wash their hands before and after operations and deliveries, he was considered a crank. He lost his job, had a mental breakdown and died in an asylum at just 47.           

 

             Even a century after the British made public their detestation of Indian toilet habits, late Victorian-age British were throwing out buckets of faeces and urine straight out of their windows. Numerous records attest that in the 19th century, when Britain was busy ‘civilising’ India, London’s air was actually insufferably foul and just outrageously smelly. The Thames river belched of human waste all the time. So unbearable was it that in 1858 — the  very year when the Crown took India over from the East India Company — a national emergency called the ‘Great Stink’ was declared. Sewerage pipes had finally to be laid as unavoidable, and it took several years to complete installing 13,000 miles of pipes under and from London.

 

              Incidentally, both germs and bacteria were virtually unknown, until Louis Pasteur could prove that ‘germs’ really existed and caused disease. The advanced west believed till the mid-19th century that ‘miasma’ or vapours brought disease. But it took three decades thereafter for Ferdinand Cohn and Robert Koch to discover ‘bacteria’ and its treatment. ‘Viruses’ were discovered  another decade later. How then was it that ancient Indians linked human excreta with disease? In their erudite research article published in June 2018 in the ‘Royal Society Journal’, entitled The structure and function of pathogen disgust, Val Curtis and Mícheál de Barra have explained that instant revulsion at pathogens was a genetic safeguard. They also stated that “Human excreta are both a major source of pathogenic viruses, bacteria and helminths and an important elicitor of disgust.” In India, this was embedded in its cultural software and hygiene was hammered in by religion —like the repeated insistence in Puranas such as the Vayu, Skanda and Garuda. They prescribed diets and insisted on total hygiene to combat jwara or fevers and disease. The Garuda Purana, for instance, is clear that illness is caused by santapa atmapacharaja or unhygienic habits, which included toilet ones. But the Puranas offered no empirical explanations and are not scientific.

 

             Though the west had insisted on its seat-toilet, its flushable version is, in fact, a recent invention. But now after it has destroyed the healthy Indian habit of the squatting toilet by touting that its commode is more ‘civilised’, it is discovering otherwise. It is slowly realising the virtues of the squatting mode, both for better bowel movements and for healthier knees. Let us hope that India’s uncompromising insistence on using water hits them soon, where it matters, and is adopted.

 

(PleaseRead Here to Read the Article on New Indian Express Website)

 


 

TRP scam proves the best of technology and systems can be compromised and sabotaged

 

            

         TRP scam proves the best of technology and systems    

                       can be compromised and sabotaged

 

                                                            Jawhar Sircar

                                        National Herald, 31 January 2021

 

 

          A personal sense of betrayal overtakes some of us who spent so much time and energy to assist the broadcasting industry in setting up what was perceived to be state-of-the-art technology of television viewership measurement. One should have realised that the finest of systems can always be sabotages by perfidious humans and devilish brains of. The Indian Broadcasting Federation (IBF) had expressed its dream of putting in position its own ratings body for long before it could succeed in doing so in 2015. It’s Broadcasting Audience Ratings Council (BARC) was the first public body that took on the monopoly enjoyed by a private rating agency called TAM Media Research. This was jointly owned by AC Nielsen and Kantar Media Research/IMRB, both of which are very well known international media houses. Besides, there was a smaller ratings firm called aMap, but the dominant player, TAM, faced perennial charges against it. The first was that it had too little a sampling base that operated through too few digital measurement meters and also that the addresses of some of these metered television households were known to a select few television broadcasters. It was alleged that these big players bribed people in some of those households where TV rating meters were installed and thereby rigged the meters in their favour. Even with a lot of assistance and guidelines from the government, It took BARC five years to actually start functioning, as the industry had to invest a lot in its hardware and software. But once it established its presence, almost the entire broadcasting industry and its advertisers moved towards this more public and transparent entity, BARC.

 

            The reason for narrating this story is to explain the background in which today’s totally targeted BARC system came into being and the extremely high hopes with which it was begotten and nursed. Even more than this, it is to recall that underhand games were known quite well under earlier rating systems as well, proving that we remain all very bad students of history. It teaches lessons that we never care to understand and then we blame poor history for repeating itself. It is, of course, a little difficult to digest how a public body so jealousy overseen by competing rivals could be taken for so big a ride. After all, beside the Indian Broadcasters Federation (IBF), BARC is governed by the apex federations of advertising and media players of India, the ISA and the AAAI. It is a pity that such hawk-eyed oversight failed to realise or suspect that its own appointed gatekeeper was compromising his and the organisation’s integrity. While governmental bodies remain notorious for their lethargic, bureaucratic style of functioning, and also because many a public servant is purchasable, while competing private bodies are said to be more alert and efficient. Like crabs in a bucket that keep sharp watch over each other, it is more than strange that the suspiciously high ratings that were awarded by BARC to some were not questioned by die-hard rivals represented on the body. Unless, of course, there are more skeletons that are yet to tumble out of the BARC cupboard.

 

            When one is openly blessed by the most powerful and forbidding prime minister in India’s history, one assumes, perhaps, that one is entitled to treat all those he targets as criminals ripe for third degree verbal torture. Especially, if the person or the organisation has opposed or differed with India’s most infallible leader. In fact, had it not been for this undisguised arrogance that this channel-head started displaying with his whiplashes, we may never even have known about the BARC’s rating scandal. In fact, the brutal manner in which this regime’s darling anchor went about manufacturing a sensational case accusing all and sundry in the Bollywood film industry after the suicide of one its stars was not only intolerable, but downright scurrilous. As he blazed on ruthlessly with his malicious conjured narrative, slashing the world around as just expendable ‘collateral damage’, he made the mistake of attacking the reputation of the police as well. Then, nemesis struck him. Isaac Newton had articulated certain laws of nature and one of them spoke of an equal and opposite reaction. This appeared in the form of a criminal case filed by Mumbai Police against him and all those who participated in the alleged manipulation of the TRP of BARC, by bribing certain metered households. The world’s largest network of television measurement and one of the most sophisticated had thus been breached by its own CEO who claims to have been paid middling amounts of money.

 

             A mass of communication through WhatsApp messages between the CEO of BARC and the head of the nation’s hottest and most acerbic channel was unlocked by the police. It was then leaked quite interestingly into the public domain. What appears quite clearly from these messages is that not only was the TRP system compromised, but the topmost secret of the State, so critical to the nation’s security and safety, may also have been divulged. This is more dangerous, and indeed, worrisome. As advocate Prashant Bhushan has demanded, it needs to be probed deeper. This can only be done by the court if it is interested or if political parties raise the issue in parliament. All other controversies and enquiries can wait, but the strong signal that someone, obviously high up, may have leaked the news of India’s top secret strike that involved the military and the air force just cannot.

         Apart from this glaring reference there are several others that reveal a very rare proximity of a media person with the prime minister — one who has gone down in history as the only one who never addressed a press conference during his tenure. It speaks of how this nearness and dearness appeared to be of adroit use in getting things done. This is what may have induced the CEO of BARC to play the game, as he appears to have been overawed by the close encounters of the deeply political kind. There is a reference to a Rathore (we had one as the junior information minister) freezing a scandal about how the indicted television channel siphoned off Doordarshan’s revenues. It would be only proper to get into it, if not for anything else, to salvage the young politician’s reputation.

 

           What appears to be panning out from these messages is more than just how the game of thrones is played: it reveals the murky rivalries that play behind the apparently united phalanx of the godi media supporting the present dispensation. Thanks to the chronically intemperate nature of our protagonist, we are rewarded with delightful invectives about the other television greats of the regime’s genuflecting brigade. There is, thus, no monolith we confront but an intensely divided ‘me only’ band of media and other forces that surround the great leader. Let us listen to history’s whispers that no such arrogant autocrat has ever been perpetuate his rule if he insists on surrounding himself with such a squabbling army of fawning retainers         

 

(PleaseClick Here to Read the Article on National Herald Website)

 


 

After a Republic Day to Remember, Will the Prime Minister Finally Read the Signs?

 

                             After a Republic Day to Remember,

              Will the Prime Minister Finally Read the Signs?

 

                                                      Jawhar Sircar

                                              The Wire, 27th January 2021

 

        It has surely been quite a different Republic Day this time and its unfortunate events will not fade as easily as the details of more spectacular performances on Rajpath. Not only because of the unexpected action that took place way beyond the agreed venues. But with the internet down, or certainly not at its best, and real time coverage tapering off, one is not certain what exactly happened in Delhi from 2 pm onward. 24x7 colour news television has certainly grown a lot since it made its debut in the war in Kuwait in early 1991 — 30 years ago, and well, that’s a lot of time. But most footage and reportage appeared to be from behind the safe security of the well-armed police. This is evident from the lengths of the shots of agitating farmers or whoever else were assuming their role. Having faced law and order in the raw, on both sides of the barricade, the numbers of farmers and tractors appeared too little to threaten Delhi Police and whatever else it has commandeered from outside. The distance of the cameramen from the really hot action-spots also revealed more than just the physical dimension of the problem. On the other hand, the footage captured by some foreign channels in the thick of things and their studied neutrality in reporting were so admirable.

 

           All said and done, the agitating farmers did break into Delhi in a manner of speaking a few hours before their agreed hour of entry. One is not sure whether it was because they wake up much earlier than those billeted in the ‘police lines’ or because of their impatience or impetuousness. But if such large loosely-organised farmers had done so after prior planning, it is surely a classic failure of police intelligence, that equals the total intelligence failure (going by the accepted narrative, of course) at Pulwama. It is unimaginable that the concerned snoops had not been able to penetrate such amorphous groups in such a long time and had this not bed able to forewarn their uniformed colleagues — that the farmers were planning not to violate the agreed script. This explosion of protest was, after all, on the 61st frustrating day of the farmers’ so-far strictly Gandhian protest. Any regime that expected utter docility and perfect discipline even then — that too, from the rather healthy specimens of humanity which inhabit these regions is living in its own created paradise. This delusion had overtaken Indira Gandhi in the past, as she had mandated that she be told what she wanted to hear. When rulers impose on organic lines of governance, including advice and prognosis of dangers, they insulate themselves from ground realities — at their own peril. ‘Intelligence’, as the term implies, is a tool that thus fails these hegemons who do not measure up to all its meanings.

 

          One is certainly not condoning the breaches or the flare-ups and definitely not the grievous assaults on policemen. A hundred must have suffered for little fault of theirs though one is not sure how many were injured in the scuffles and from the long arm of the law. The destruction of public property means taxpayers suffer, but Delhi Police discovered to its dismay in handling these matters is surely tougher than framing criminal and sedition charges against those not so guilty. What the police had set up so cockily  as immovable barriers to prevent protesters from entering were tossed away by the hefty and the determined. These case-studies and erroneous tactics would have be re-examined in police seminars and workshops for quite some time to come. The failure of the farmers’ leaders to discipline their supporters or whoever was up to dangerous mischief was abysmal. No one can ever condone such violence but one could at least anticipate that Red Fort and ITO could be targets, once agitators broke into the city from multiple directions. The first has always been a favourite one for all who seek to enter the city in triumph — from Timur Lang and Nadir Shah to Indian Sepoys of Meerut in 1857 or British commanders like Nicholson and Wilson soon thereafter. Having said that, one must say that the administration displayed commendable patience by not taking up the gun, because that would surely have led to worse consequences.

 

           What was so stark was that most TV anchors went on expressing a lot of indignation and some burst into emotionally-charged high-decibel outburst of rage against those who challenge the regime —often spluttering with rage. Their on-the-spot representatives with cameras appeared equally incensed and poured more inflammatory material into the sizzle. While this may be in line with the newly acquired role of this media to churn out running invectives, prosecutions and judgements, their cameras were either not corroborating or being provocative enough. The media’s age old role of not exacerbating riotous situations is fast dwindling, as TRP and patriotism rule the screen, even after it is being brought out in the public domain that the first can also jump higher, for thirty pieces of silver. Even in this new age of regime-prompted rage, we may do well to remember that credibility still matters to many, as much as the blindly devoted require their regular fixes of incendiary visuals to sustain their irrational highs.

 

            The television camera clearly showed, for instance, that the national flag was fluttering high and proud from its appointed flagstaff on Red Fort, even when a frenzied supporter clambered up, rather dextrously, on another pole to foist his flag of defiance. This was on a shorter and subordinate pole affixed outside the fort, on the ramparts. But the anchor almost choked as he kept on narrating that our sacred national flag had been defiled by some blasphemous invader. The point we submit is that such open distortions and provocative and infuriating anchoring may earn kudos from the present powers that be, but the media person besmirches his or her own reputation for ever. Besides, he or she indulges is collaborating with the divider in chief in the ruinous mission to fragment the multi-ethnic nation that defied all prophets of doom to emerge out of splinters and coalesce. This happened because so many sacrificed so much. While none expect small town provincial leaders with dubious degrees and backgrounds to possess or acquire even a fraction the vision of the Mahatma, Gurudev or Netaji, the conscience can at least prompt where to draw the line in colluding in divisionism.

 

              The Sikhs, who appear to be most prominent in this historic struggle of the farmers, have been constantly sniped at and poked on grounds of their affluence, conspiracy with Khalistanis, obscurantist opposition to brilliant reforms and sheltering of despicable middleman. As one of India’s proudest and hardiest people, who braved the sharpest of winters in the open, facing water canons and rains with equanimity, they have ignored the taunts of those who have never matched either their record of sacrifice or boldness. The Jats, who are as robust and hard-working, may be less prominent as their turbans do not stand out so colourfully. But they are as determined. Their contribution to India and its food security through the Green Revolution, is as commendable. So are those of several other farming communities that are protesting against farm laws that were hustled through. Ironically, this pre-planned ham-handing was executed by the only prime minister in history who kissed the floor of parliament before entering it for the first time, and then went out undermining this august institution of democracy, and many others as well, with a ruthlessness never seen before.

 

         The fact that the disorganised protest is retreating does not indicate that the crisis is over. In fact, it now calls not for obstinacy or continued contempt. Victimisation or encouraging the deliberate defaming of farming communities and all opposition will only worsen the situation. We now require a patient handling that transcends the craftsmanship of just words and the proven excellence of election-management. If there is any hidden statesmanship in the prime minister, it is time for it to break free and reach out to those who may well have entered the hallowed city — to demonstrate their utter seriousness. For once, the signs may be read more astutely.

 

(PleaseClick Here to Read the article on The Wire Website)

 


 

When Human Bonding is Splintered

 

                          When Human Bonding is Splintered

                                       

                                        Jawhar Sircar

 

                                New Indian Express, 8th January, 2021

 

 

               After the unending months of 2020, we now feel a bit relieved as we assume, with or without basis, that the worst may be over. As we click the ‘pause button’ of Covid 19, it may be appropriate to attempt an interim appraisal of the effects and the devastation caused by a microscopic mass-murdering virus.

 

       Day after day, we had noted with palpitation as casualties mounted, but now we discover that the toll in India of around 1.5 lakh is the same that we lose to accidents or respiratory diseases or stroke each year. In fact, it is actually less than one fourth the number killed annually by heart disease or by deadly cancer. But, then, this Chitragupta-style of reporting to Yamraj about the relative strike rate of his gruesome weapons is not quite a pleasant task. And, the fact that the world’s most advanced nation fared much worse than us is certainly not a valid reason for even muted schadenfreude.

 

                Those who take a more magisterial view of life have noted with alarm how precariously ‘sociability’, the very pillar that holds up the human race, was attacked mercilessly by the virus. Its long-term impact may be worse than just death-tolls. The crux of this apprehension is that if ‘social distancing’ and ‘work from home’ are here to stay, our human engineering may need complete re-wiring. History tells us that the desperate need to survive against all odds, especially in the face of much more powerful carnivores, led our hominid ancestral cousins, Homo Erectus, to form hunters’ groups — some 18 lakh years ago.

 

              Since then, there was no turning back — as the human family evolved from ‘being the hunted into the hunter’. This induced our forefathers to aggregate in ever-increasing numbers, to band together for hunting and sharing the life-saving meat of jointly killed animals. As Louis Liebenberg has demonstrated in his seminal essay in the ‘Journal of Human Evolution (2008)’ on The Relevance of Persistence Hunting to Human Evolution, it was this community bonding that ensured that humanoids survived. Of the latter, our species, the Homo Sapiens, proved most adaptable and innovative and hence we advanced, while all other analogous lines became extinct. Many feel that the subsequent adoption of vegetarianism is really an evolutionary improvement. What everyone agrees is that ‘pure vegetation food’ is surely India’s invaluable gift to the world, like yoga and the zero.

 

           For these 18 lakh years, inter-human communication and team-cooperation have been our primary binders and it is this ‘community core’ where the virus hit the most. Though segregation of the infected has been practiced earlier, in epidemics like the more deadly plague, never before have so many countries of the world been infected simultaneously and ‘locked-down’ together. Scourges come and go, but this Covid-driven atomisation of human society is viewed as more devastating than the calamities that rocked us in the twentieth century. We lost 30 crore people to Smallpox; nearly 8 crore died during the Spanish flu of 1918-20 and a similar shocking number perished in the Second World War. During and after these devastations, hands joined together to mend the world and life bounced back. But this time, both ‘hands’ and ‘together’ are viewed as dark messengers of death and every person is suspect.

 

              We may, however, need to ponder further before declaring that Covid marks the end of the world we were born into. This world had already started ‘ending’ a decade ago, when faster internet connectivity and the smartphone took over. One noted with concern, long before Covid had arrived, that physical proximity was surely being trampled upon by virtual communication. The character of social bonding was altered beyond redemption. In every social gathering, we noticed how after a few moments of culture-induced bonhomie, even the best of friends or the closest of family members simply looked away from each other. They were totally engrossed elsewhere — with their mobiles. Lockdowns actually restored, to some extent, closeness within the much-neglected family or immediate groups, as everyone pooled in with basic chores and living rooms became livelier. Since work became site-agnostic and menial help was blocked out, many young and terribly busy persons went back to their parents, who double-doted on them because they had hardly ever got them so close for so long.

 

             Bruce Daisley, author of The Joy of Work, has discussed ‘personal satisfaction’ in the context of jobs and challenges, while anthropologist James Suzman looks differently. In his Work: A History of How We Spend Our Time, Suzman emphasises that keeping ourselves occupied is more essential for retaining sanity than labour-saving, productivity-obsessed technologies. Basically, we now have certain critical issues to ponder, in the context of Covid-imposed and digitally-driven fragmentation of human society. Can the scatterednew normalsubstitute the warmth of the primal ‘hunting group’ and its worthy successors? Will the virtual world and its task/accomplishment fixation be able to satisfy the basic craving of humans for company and relaxation? Would these dispersed humans be able to avoid the disastrous effects of anomie and depression that afflict those who de-link from emotionally essential social solidarity groups. Only time will tell us how adroitly this distanced digitally-united universe tackles these concerns — by re-inventing itself.

 

 

(Please Click Here to Read the article on New Indian Express Website)

 

 


 

Wednesday, 30 June 2021

Saluting a Mentor — Basanta Chowdhury

 

            Saluting a Mentor — Basanta Chowdhury

                                      Jawhar Sircar

                       The SpaceLink of Banglalive.com, 20 June 2021

 

             In Writers Buildings, there was a sense of shock when word of Basanta Chowdhury’s death spread through the centuries-old corridors of power. This was exactly 21 years ago and many of us moved on to the Nandan film complex, Basanta Chowdhury’s workplace in some sense, to express a collective sense of grief. I had known him for over two decades and had became fairly close in the last few years, enough to take cheeky liberties. What all of us really regretted was that he had left us much too early. The obituaries that rolled out soon thereafter confirmed my guess — he was just 72 years when he died — which was outrageously unfair, to a veritable fountain of talent and scholarship. 

 

            Like everyone else, I had seen him first on the screen, and until  1979, he remained primarily an unforgettable movie actor, always at a distance. His role as Raja Rammohun Roy is etched for ever in the public imagination, and somehow, even after so many decades, the two great sons of Bengal remain inextricably linked. He was surely “of Bengal” but he was not born “in Bengal”. His birth was in 1928 in distant Nagpur, and he must have acquired his flawless Hindi there, in his childhood and youth. It was  a treat to see his command over a language that defeats the most valorous of Bengalis, who just cannot match the inscrutable gender of nouns with their verbs, and can hardly ever transcend the overwhelming accent of the Bengali language.  Not only was his Hindi just too perfect, but so was his impeccable delivery of English. He elevated both languages with his god-gifted baritone voice. This is what impressed me and I told him so when I met him for the first time — and also that I despaired that I would never hear the two languages pronounced the way they should. He burst instantly into a loud laughter and said I reminded him of Henry Higgins’s stinging indictment of accents, elocution and  language. He had gone straight to Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, that is more famous by its film version, My Fair Lady. And then, he spoke extempore for the next twenty minutes or so on this rather less-discussed area.

 

       That explains what Basanta Chowdhury really was —a thespian who had soared above, to unusual heights. He combined the roles of a theatre actor, film star, elocutionist, scholar, expert, numismatist, antiquarian, collector and historian so effortlessly. And his tall handsome frame was presented in his sartorial excellence, in a shining white dhoti and a kurta or panjabi as we call it, replete with a remarkable shawl perched on his shoulder. He would light up whichever party, reception or cultural meet he would stride into, with his unmistakable regal bearing. No doubt about that. But what overwhelmed those around him was his unique skill in picking on any topic and expounding on an unknown or lesser-known aspect of it — not with any overbearing pedantry but in a witty, easy conversational style. He knew a lot, across a mind-boggling array of subjects, and that is what marked him out in a profession which did not house too many intellectuals.

 

          It was as an intellectual that I had engaged him first. I was just 27 years old, in 1979, four years into the Indian Administrative Service. I had been posted as Sub Divisional Officer in charge of Barrackpore, the southern  borders of which were well into the metropolis of Kolkata. This urban tract stretched from Salt Lake, Lake Town, Dum Dum and Baranagar in the south and it meant that I visited Kolkata proper, whatever that meant, quite frequently. This gave me some opportunity to see my parents and catch up with friends as well. During this phase, a common friend, Bibhash Gupta, took me to a fascinating scholar and cultural historian, Radha Prasad Gupta. Bibhash babu was a philatelist, antiquarian, collector and an expert on the history and culture of Kolkata while Radha Prasad Gupta or RP, as he was called, was a master in almost all these areas, except perhaps, philately. He was famous even then for his erudition, and within a very short time, he drew me close — teaching me a lot. RP’s immediate circle consisted of three absolute stalwarts of cultural enquiry in Kolkata and on the Bengali culture as such — beside other domains like art and literature. They were Basanta Chowdhury, antiquarian Shubha Tagore, journalist and author Nikhil Sarkar. The four were joined, on and off, by — lo and behold — Mulk Raj Anand from

Bombay.

 

            I soon discovered a new, exciting world, as RP and Vasant-da poured their knowledge over me. I hardly understood then how fortunate I was when they took me for chats at Shuva Tagore’s flat. This was in the ancient but magnificent LIC-owned palatial building, at the crossing of SN Banerjea Road and Chowringhee. I remember both my visits to this unforgettable apartment, so full with Tagore’s priceless collection of all types of pipes and smoking devices and countless other artefacts and paintings. RP, Basanta Chowdhury and Shuva babu were joined on one occasion by Nikhil Sarkar and Bibhas Gupta. Had I known then that this was, indeed, a very precious meeting of some of the finest minds of Kolkata, I would have begged, borrowed or stolen a camera to capture it on celluloid. Anyway, on their persuasion, I stated reading a lot of books and articles — between my exacting duties of maintaining law and order in a perennially problematic area and of executing endless welfare schemes. I stumbled upon a magic world of culture and found in it a perfect antidote to the inescapable tension of trying to administer a volatile population. It also helped reduce the frustrating boredom and frustration of forever complying with a rule-bound bureaucracy.

 

          Basanta Chowdhury often regaled me with rare gems from the history of Kolkata and its captivating history and culture, while RP added other stories — in his inimitable manner of speaking, in chaste, antiquated but almost-forgotten dialect of ‘old North Kolkata’. Beside listening and asking, my task was also to pour, at appropriate intervals, exact amounts of cognac into an oversized balloon glass for Vasant-da. RP preferred Old Monk rum and I helped him fill up his quite plebeian tumbler. Basanta Chowhury often moved away from old Kolkataand led me on to the people and the culture of the lesser-known southeastern region of undivided Bengal, Tripura and the Arakan. He was an acknowledged authority on this area and an internationally-known coin collector of these territories. He had written so many erudite articles on them. His forays also took him to the North-Eastern states of India and he would occasionally take out a careful-protected coin from the side pocket of his crisp white kurta or ‘punjabi’ to show us a rare coin. Sometimes, it was an intriguing Ganesh and Basanta C was widely known as a pioneer in collecting Ganesh images of different shapes, sizes and forms. This was long before it became a fashionable hobby. The point is that whatever he loved he also took pains to learn a lot about it and to specialise in the sector. His fantastic collection of Ganesh-es were donated to the Indian Museum and are now a part of its famous collections.

 

          But, I forgot to mention what he was best known for, beyond these talents, namely as a film actor. Basanta Das first film, Mahaprasthaner Pathe, was released in 1952 —the year I was born. Among his most memorable films (other than Raja Rammohun Roy, that I have mentioned earlier) are Bhagaban Shri Krishna Chaitanya, Deep Jwele Jaay, Anushtoop Chhanda, Abhaya O Srikanta, Jadu Bhatta, Andhare Alo, Diba Ratrir Kabya and Devi Chaudhurani. I remember some of the tales he narrated to me in Delhi, where I had moved between late 1986 and December 1991. I remember how he explained his role in a forthcoming film, Antarjali Jatra, and then elaborated on the subject of redundancy in old age and the ritual invitation to death. A few months, Goutam Ghose premiered this film in Delhi and practically hijacked me to see Basanta da and others act in it. I will never forget how perplexed my wife, Nandita, was, later that evening in 1988, when Goutam da trooped in with the actress of his film, Antarjali Jatra, her mother and other members of his team. Once my wife had tided over her major problems like how to seat all the guests and how to feed them, Goutam da (who had got food over as well) and Shampa Ghosal, the new star, recounted how Basanta Chowdhury and Shatrughan Sinha had bowled over the cast and the villagers who had crowded all over. Within weeks, I also heard their part of the story from the two stalwarts, who were visited Delhi soon thereafter. On another occasion, he was in full form as we settled in with some fine cognac. It was nestled in an impressive bulbous glass, a set of which I had bought mainly for VIP guests like him. Basanta Chowdhury would hold us spellbound — taking occasional sips from the glass and drags from the very fashionable cigar that he held between the fingers of his left hand. He discussed Rituparna Ghosh’s Hirer Aangti (The Diamond Ring) in which he was then acting, but my wife would keep asking him questions about how exhilarating it must have been to work with Suchitra Sen, in films like Deep Jwale Jaay and Devi Chaudhaurani. I was more interested in how the directors behaved with a towering personality like him. He must have acted in almost a hundred films in his four long decades of acting — and also received so many awards.

 

           Like every true actor, he was not confined only to films and was also equally comfortable with theatre and radio. I remember many a tip that he gave me on diction and delivery, as I had also dabbled with radio — from 1971, my early days with Akashvani Kolkata’s Yuva Vani channel. He explained how not to drop a single syllable and yet not sound artificial at all. We went over our private rehearsals, quite seriously. When theatre, jatras and cabaret came too close to each other for comfort, in Kolkata in the 1980s, Basanta da was quite at ease with the first two. He would drop in occasionally at my huge British-era bungalow at Barddhaman, where I happened to be the District Magistrate. This was in 1985 and 1986 and he was on his ‘jatra tours’ to different small towns of Bengal. I learnt from witnesses that he was the main attraction and that people had bought up all tickets well in advance, just to see him act and hear his voice. A true thespian till his last day.

 

        In 1997, I was placed on the Kolkata International Film Festival’s Advisory Committee, where he was the Chairman. In fact, he was Chairman of the entire Nandan Film Centre and we met more frequently. He was an ideal person to preside over such meetings as he let everyone speak and tactfully avoided spats that are so common in the world of cinema and in the performing arts. We took pride in organising spectacular film festivals, thanks to the chief minister’s personal interest and a very enterprising team. After it was all over, I would whisper an invitation into his ears — to come home for some decent drinks. I proceed ahead of him as he preferred to drive his own black Austin. The rest of the evening was more than well spent. I am reminded of a story that Vir Sanghvi recounted after his death — of how he tackled the pompous. It was at a grand dinner party at the Oberoi Grand that Vir and he were accosted and disturbed by a socialite lady, who was hell bent on monopolising the conversation and was constantly dropping names. Basanta da turned to her and introduced Vir as a very famous Bollywood film star she must know. Not only was the lady sufficiently overawed but the pair could then talk among themselves, without her conceited interruptions. He proved he could act in real life, too.

 

           Chowdhury's collection of Kashmiri and Persian shawls were truly enviable and he picked up masterpieces from North East as well. They suited him as someone who could carry them with befitting elan. Even Satyajit Ray admired his taste in this domain. It is said that he borrowed some from him or that Basanta da helped him procure rare pieces for his movies. The pride of place went to a silk shawl from Varanasi that was had the Lord’s name embroidered all over, like a namavali. I am shocked at my impertinence those days, as I would often lift a shawl off his shoulder and place it on mine. Even as onlookers observed quite aghast, he complimented me for my newly acquired treasure — he had no other choice. I would then grandly inform him that his shawl had been ‘nationalised’. What, on earth? I proceeded to explain quite cockily that if government (sarkar or sircar) ever needed something it would dispossess the the owner. That property was nationalised, wasn’t it? As he looked quite perplexed, I would return the shawl and place it on his shoulder. But I also requested him to kindly remember to mention it in his will that he would gift it to me. He said he would favourably consider the proposition, but the cruel, untimely hand of death gave him no such chance. But, God is lucky — for Basanta Chowdhury must now be regaling Him with some of his most attractive of stories.

 

(Please Click Here to Read the article on the publisher's website)

           

 

         

Tuesday, 20 April 2021

The Problem with the Civil Services

 

                                The Problem with the Civil Services  

                                                  Jawhar Sircar

             Some 46 years ago, I left a blue chip company to join the IAS and while many of my colleagues there retired with tens of crores of rupees, some in hundreds as well, my savings and investments at the end of almost 42 years are too embarrassingly small to mention. Be that as it may, the experience that I picked up is worth millions, as is the feeling, however misplaced, that one has served the nation — in spite of odds. The India of today is, however, dramatically different from what it was four decades ago and it feels good to think that we have contributed to many of the changes. A large number of people do not, however, subscribe to any upbeat feelings and many sincerely believe that the bureaucracy as a whole has certainly not moved with the times. A big section fumes with uncontrollable rage at the slothy, negative and corrupt behomoth and they are within their rights to demand drastic reforms — without any loss of time. Numerous are the international reports that castigate Indian officialdom as the most insurmountable impediment to any change.

 

            But reform what? The entire system? Or the IAS? Well, the central bureaucracy has some 33 lakhs employees, where the IAS numbers less than 500 — which comes to just 0.015 percent. All states put together employ 2 crores and IAS officers count around 5000, which is too tiny to count. Yes, they do occupy many senior posts and these stark figures are only to clarify to many who equate the whole bureaucracy with the IAS. Similarly, the top central services constitute too tiny a number in the ocean of officialdom. Who will bring in the change? Let’s face it: if the most dramatically hyperactive prime minister in Indian history could make nothing more than a few scratches on the surface of the huge bureaucracy in almost seven years, God alone knows who can to turn it around? And accusing the IAS, the IPS or the central services for the ills of the entire system that they largely inherited may give vent to built-up steam, but is, frankly, like blaming the driver for whatever is wrong with the car. There is, of course, a counter point that this driver is also a qualified mechanic and, several who reach the top do play a considerable role in automobile engineering or crafting the system. One cannot thus evade total responsibility.

 

          It is a different matter altogether that the political class has taken over all major policy-making responsibilities. Even after so many committees and commissions, senior-most officers have not succeeded in convincing their rulers to de-weed the system or introduce structural changes. The takeover by the political class started with Indira Gandhi and whatever little autonomy still existed was stamped out vigorously by Narendra Modi. No doubt about that. Why don’t the officers revolt? They do — not revolt, but some surely differ, at least till recently. The terrible fate of those officers in Gujarat who differed with Modi or stood up to him are, of course, fresh in the minds of all. Also fresh is the sight of the disproportionate amount of goodies heaped on those who agreed with boss and did even more. The ‘beheading’ of several top secretaries at the top strata in the central government is recent memory most would, therefore, like to be as ‘proper’ as possible. A few, of course, fantasise of the good times that were showered on those who destroyed constitutional bodies to grovel. But before branding the whole lot of officers as spineless, we may like to look around to see which corporate or media house or merchant’s outfit rewards those who differ. Public services were, of course, better but the degree of difference has come down a lot — at least where the cherries are concerned.

 

              Many of our generation who took to ‘reforms’ at our level and insisted on digital correspondence more than a decade ago enthused practically no one. As Culture secretary, one was gently advised that the quick decisions one took over email did not really count unless they were “reduced to writing” in bulky files and “duly authenticated”, ie, signed. Many babus were also concerned at the “lack of secrecy” over mails, until I explained that if the Indian state could surely not be threatened by an exchange of emails on where to hold the next folk dance festival. The nay-sayers were bullied into submission, but in the next posting (as head of the public broadcaster), one has on record a note from an officer of the rank of Director General refusing to go digital on the ground that the Rules did not provide for this banal option — at least not then. Officials were obviously more accustomed to waiting for long periods for bulky files with familiar bureaucratic notes from Section Officers to climb several layers up, over many days, with those above this wise man just adding their signatures on it. These files took (and still take) equally long periods to travel down, past so many autograph-adding strata. This is a small example of how the system simply refuses to change habits — but if the order came from someone dreadful (like the PM), officials would sing choruses and change somewhat. They would, of course, snicker at his folly, during their longish tiffin breaks.

 

                One often wonders what on earth happens to those bright, highly-qualified thousand-odd young men and women who emerge successful each year in the civil services examination — out of the 11 lakhs who apply and 5.5 lakhs who actually appear at the test. This small number (it went down to 750 recently) represents one the toughest tests in the world and the profiles of many are, indeed, what any multinational corporation would lap up for many, many times the salary that the Indian nation offers. These few undergo a fairly long, rigorous multi-faceted training that has largely adapted with the times. It converts a heterogeneous mass from impossibly diverse backgrounds and disciplines into a more determined ‘mission team’, but this is the story of only the higher services. We overlook the fact that the large three-fourths or more of the pyramid below this level — the cutting edge of the clerk, the constable and village official — remains pretty much the same as it was ages ago. True, some sort of a training is sought to be meted out, often too late in the day, but the denizens of these really powerful layers pick up survivors’s guidelines and tricks of the trade from wizened seniors. The upper bureaucracy simply cannot deny that it has hardly succeeded in instilling its sense of mission into these levels — that really interface with our citizenry the most. And, it must, therefore, share the blame for this largely incorrigible lot. It is not as if this army of babus and sipahis is all that bad — it has, as we all know, the good, the bad and the ugly. The last two remain imbedded in public imagination. Some clerks or constables revel in showing off their power (which is far disproportionate to their rank and pay); some create problems as they are obsessed with rules and their rigid interpretation, while a sizeable number uses whatever is available to extort whatever is possible from people.

 

          So dependant is the upper strata of the bureaucracy on this ‘army’ that it can hardly reform or punish it. Even the stubborn few who are fired by zeal ultimately concede to the persuasion of the middle layers that deals with them, day and night. And when the corrupt section of the upper strata makes hay while the sun shines, it naturally works hand in glove with those whose depredations are proverbial. When one hears of very young IAS officers hell bent on making money from day one, one hangs one’s head in shame. Every time a crisis happens or a scandal breaks out, there is a witch-hunt that can hardly succeed in ferreting rats out of holes, but it ends up by further tightening rules or procedures. This actually facilitates the corrupt to extort even more. The procedure to punish is so, so complicated and time consuming that one thinks twice before initiating action. One is still suffering in courts many years after retirement (and paying from one’s pension) to defend for bona fide actions taken against despicable officers years ago. Naturally, the wiser decide not to take action. Dealing with corruption and stronger punitive action are crying for attention, but who will bell the cat?

The Bulldozer Is the Latest Symbol of Toxic Masculinity to Create Havoc in the Populace

  The Bulldozer Is the Latest Symbol of Toxic Masculinity to Create Havoc in the Populace                                               ...