Press Release: Fan-tass-tic

July 27th, 2010 by nepalidada

It has come to the attention of the long latent communications department of the Nepali Dada Party that the millions and millions of its Indian cohorts are requesting the Nepali Dada Party to intervene and correct the gross incompetences and negligence that is being exhibited by the Government of India.

The Nepali Dada Party sympathizes with its cohorts and loves bengali begams! But unfortunately, the Nepali Dada Party does not entangle itself in the issues of another sovereign nation. That is unless, the people within that nation declare themselves to be sovereign from the said sovereign nation and join the great mass of people that compose the nation of nations – The Party. Should this be the case, the Party shall reach forth and save the tormented souls that find no salvation in the polluted tradition and history of the sub-continent and unleash a fresh new beginning.

The Nepali Dada Party has successfully established itself as the sole power in Nepal. It would like to remind the people of Nepal that the new prime minister will be chosen when the Party feels it is necessary for Nepal to yet again assume the notion that the nation is ruled by a pseudo-democratic government rather than the whims of the Nepali Dada Party. Let this be a statement of the vitality of the party’s working organs.

Kancho Dada, Communications and PR Manager of the Nepali Dada Party

Hamara Osama

July 22nd, 2010 by laxmim

A fake bin Laden provides some laughs along with a sharp comment on the “war on terror”, the media, and US policy on Afghanistan.

By Laxmi Murthy

A spoof about the US ‘war on terror’, the Pakistani desperation to emigrate and a satirical take on the media’s obsession with ‘Breaking News’ could go badly wrong in hands that excel in slapstick or melodrama. But right from the disclaimer about resemblance to any person living or dead being purely ‘coincidental’, director Abhishek Sharma pulls it off, tongue firmly in cheek. The pun in the title which could be read as ‘Without you, Laden’, or ‘Your bin Laden’. Onward, smart acting and witty dialogues effortlessly steer the film through potential minefields, quite literally.

In his Bollywood debut, Ali Zafar, Pakistani pop star-turned actor, plays the charming Ali Hassan, a reporter with a seedy channel appropriately named Dunka TV with a blundering dictatorial boss brilliantly played by Piyush Mishra. Hassan, desperate to climb out of his rut, devises a scheme involving a fake Osama bin Laden to earn enough money to buy his way into America on a fake passport. He’s already been deported once from the US, after a paranoid flight attendant gets him into the clutches of Homeland Security, where, please note, his mugshot is taken as ‘Southasian’ rather than any specific country.

It is the little asides, providing a telescopic view of life and dreams in Southasia, that are insightful and poignant. At the fake-passport and visa agency, Lashkar-e-Amrika (Invading America since 2002 as the board proudly proclaims), the sleazy owner calls theatrically for the ‘Late file’, stuffed with the photos and personal details of the deceased who will now be resurrected in fake passports. ‘Better late than never,’ he smirks. His perky assistant Zoya, yearning to own her own beauty parlour, marks time with dexterous use of Photoshop to touch up photos of potential immigrants to match those in the ‘Late File’. The eagerness of the safari-suited Intelligence guys whipping out their little digital cameras as soon as they come upon bin Laden, is likewise another perceptive comment on the Southasian penchant to be photographed with celebrities.

The real star of course is the bespectacled Noora, the Osama bin Laden look-alike brilliantly played by Pradhuman Singh. A poultry farmer with a passion for chickens and their crowing (his prize rooster Sikandar is the winner of the local ‘Muqabla-e-Baang’), the Punjabi-spouting bin Laden is a riot through and through. Although he is too busy peering down Zoya’s blouse while she’s applying make-up to impersonate the most-wanted man on earth, at times of stress, Noora’s earthy Punjabi surfaces. Hassan’s prank, in which he is assisted by a set of loyal but bumbling friends, soon spins out of control, which even the America-hating Communist radio jockey Qureshi does not predict. It is only Hassan’s lovable character that allows you to ignore the unscrupulous methods employed to create a scoop when he cannot get one.

What could have been the weakest link in the plot – the alacrity and blind faith with which Live India, an Indian Channel, buys the fake tape, and News America broadcasts it after ‘experts’ declare it to be authentic, turns out to be a stark comment on the irresponsible news media in the Subcontinent. Far from questioning the authenticity of the tape or the subsequent attacks on Afghanistan (’Operation Kickass’), TV anchors solemnly report on the number of donkeys ‘martyred’ during the Operation, and talk-show hosts remark on bin Laden’s ‘healthy’ visage, speculating that he must have good access to medical care. Unfortunately, sloppy and unethical journalism is no Bollywood hyperbole.

It was not long ago, after serial blasts in Ahmedabad, Surat and Bangalore in mid-2008 that one ‘Tauqeer’ or Abdus Subhan Qureishi was identified as the ‘mastermind’ of the blasts. Reputed dailies across the country soon carried profiles of ‘India’s Osama Bin Laden’, detailing his alleged involvement in high-profile attacks in various cities. When, a few months later Rakesh Maria, Mumbai’s joint police commissioner (crime) called Tauqeer a ‘media creation’, the media was uncharacteristically silent, sheepish about having lapped up police handouts, and fabricating a ‘terrorist’ to suit their convenience. (See Jyoti Punwani’s excellent expose ‘Creating Tauqeer‘.

The corny platitudinous climax can be forgiven… every filmmaker gets to have a cop out, if it is reasonably comic, and this one certainly fits the bill. ‘Mood bana dey, yaar,’ pleads Hassan, and Noora obliges, turning out a Bin Laden performance par excellence, complete with Arabic intonation. Catchy music, many of the numbers sung by Ali Zafar himself, complement the light-hearted breezy pace.

That the film grossed around INR 50 million in the first week of its release in India, and USD 150,000 from Britain, Australia and the UAE, goes to show that well-made comedy need not bomb at the box office even it does not have the staple item numbers, song and dance sequences or token romance. The US release has been deferred in order to monitor audience reaction in other countries, according to the producers, even though the name of the film has already been shortened to ‘Tere Bin’ to pass it off as an innocuous love story. Of course, the cardboard cut out, moronic American caricatures shouldn’t be a reason to ban the film in the US. The name-change ploy hasn’t worked in Pakistan, where the film is banned, but pirated DVDs are doubtless flying off the shelves, providing a laugh a minute in drawing rooms across the country.

Tere Bin Laden
Dir:
Abhishek Sharma
Producer:
Aarti Shetty and Pooja Shetty Deora
Walkwater Media, July 2010

A Jalib whose death is not silent

July 20th, 2010 by admin

Ahmed Yusuf writes about the recent assassination of BNP-M Secretary-General Habib Jalib Baloch, and the life of his namesake.

BNP-M Secretary-General Habib Jalib Baloch

BNP-M Secretary-General Habib Jalib Baloch

Habib Jalib Baloch, the secretary-general of the Balochistan National Party-Mengal (BNP-M), was gunned down on 14 July in Quetta, in what is believed to be a targeted attack. The incident took place in broad daylight, when Baloch was dropping his children off to school en route to work where he was to plead a case before a court of Pakistani law.

Baloch is the second Jalib to have attained iconic status. The first, Habib Jalib, was a poet of revolution whose writings only got posthumous recognition from the Punjab government. Despite his overt ideological leanings, he was kept on the ‘outside’ in the Communist Party of Pakistan, ostensibly to protect the identities of the party’s inner core. Jalib was to work on a mass front; after all, he was a man of the people.

Tortured and incarcerated by four successive regimes over three decades for his ‘unpopular’ views, Jalib’s political acumen is perhaps least stated. His poem, Jaag Mere Punjab (Wake up, my people of Punjab), while directed against the Pakistani establishment, urged his people and comrades to take stock of the fragile situation in Sindh and Balochistan, especially in the post-1971 context.

Nonetheless, the Pakistan establishment failed to appreciate Jalib’s aspirations for a united and harmonious confederation. Pakistan – the entity – would remain intact, but there would be social justice among provinces and the people of these provinces, Jalib believed. Nor did his comrades manage to appreciate the gravity of the situation in the smaller provinces of Pakistan, especially Sindh and Balochistan, that he had pointed to. General Zia ul-Haq’s persecution of leftist and other progressive activists and the fall of the Soviet Union meant that by the time Jalib was released from incarceration by Benazir Bhutto, the Left was largely disorganised.

Jalib breathed his last on March 12, 1993. His demise was mourned in limited leftist circles, but he went away silently.

Habib Jalib Baloch’s death, on the other hand, is not so silent.

Baloch’s party, BNP-M, is among the last remaining political forces from Balochistan that engaged with the Pakistani state. The party’s ideological bearings are premised on the goal of self-determination through a peaceful and democratic struggle, while their secular outlook found company in the liberal and progressive circles of Lahore and Islamabad.

As news of his assassination began to spread, many outside Balochistan hurriedly arranged demonstrations to protest the killing. In Balochistan proper, riots and violence erupted across the province – even before the police stopped and tear-gassed a BNP-M contingent which was carrying the body of their secretary general to the Governor House to protest the killing.

Political and social activists described Baloch as an affectionate man, a perceptive operator, a shrewd activist, and certainly, a man of the people. And the Baloch people responded to their Jalib’s killing in the ultimate paradox: violence as a riposte to the killing of a man non-violence. Within hours of the murder and police brutality, BNP-M chief Akhtar Mengal declared on television that he had lost all hope in Pakistan’s state machinery or even the judiciary to deliver anything to the Baloch. The BNP-M had also announced a 40-day mourning and a three-day strike; violence was reported on each of these days.

Both Jalibs were men of the people. Both came from humble backgrounds, making their identification with ideals of social justice as part of a more organic process. Most importantly, both men were grounded in their times. The first Jalib may not have been blessed with a vibrant movement at the time of his demise, but the second was part of a movement that seeks independence from Pakistan. In the past, the BNP-M was accused of being bedfellows with Nawaz Sharif, who supported the formation of Akhtar Mengal’s government in Balochistan. The heroic status accorded to Nawab Akbar Bugti – who also engaged with the Pakistani state for a long time – on his demise may serve as a reminder of how previous discretions have been ignored, and how newer legends come to be formed. The reaction to Baloch’s assassination simply underlined the fact.

While Islamabad and Punjab struggle to deal with the war on terror and innumerable suicide attacks, targeted attacks in Balochistan have gone largely unnoticed. Cases of missing people are still unresolved, and local journalists have reported the use of drones to crush militant Baloch segments. Attacks on both ethnic and non-ethnic Baloch have been taking place with regularity and while they may serve to discredit the movement, in equal measure, every political activist who perishes in the struggle adds to the folklore of the Baloch nationalist movement of today. The imagination of that account has no place for Pakistan or Punjab.

It is a pity that Habib Jalib Baloch, who retained some trust in the Pakistani constitution, could not be protected by the law or those who enforce the law. When he stepped out of his house on 14 July, little had he known that those who threatened to kill him would execute their plans that day. His demise shattered any (cosmetic) bonds forged by the democratic government, but the importance of his life was lost in the imagination of the Pakistani establishment.

The phrase, ‘Jaag Meray Punjab‘, rings even louder today. Rest in peace, Habib Jalib Baloch.

Ahmed Yusuf is a Karachi-based journalist.

Remembering Frantz Fanon

July 16th, 2010 by nandiniramachandran

Had he lived, he would turn 85 today. To his virtues, let me quote Sartre:

Fanon is the first since Engels to bring the process of history to the clear light of day… [he constitutes] step by step, the dialectic which liberal hypocrisy hides from you and which is as much responsible for our existence as for his.

There are many empires, uncountable hundreds, vying for the patriotic mind. One itches like a parasite at the skin of erstwhile India, another marches out of Kashmir to meet it. Another variant is mapped out across the water in Africa and Arabia. Yet another engulfs the fluctuating borders of meta-Europe, bleeding at this end and drowning at those, weighed down by ennui and the Oneiroi. Regional empires, of crime, of time, of political bastions, of cities and Panchayats, blot upon the body-politic of my democracy as much as all others.

The modern mind is under similar siege. Industry steams on brutally appropriated soil and soul. Will o’wisps markets tumble crooked in the wind, bent out of shape and reason. Nationalisms sour almost as soon as the nation is born, if not before.  Revolutions seduce wantonly around street corners, peddling salvation and cocaine, obscuring the hangover. Patriarchy everywhere runs riot, corrupting what we coyly call the worlds within. Superimposed on all this chaos is the empire of the mind: the bipolar internet where we lucky few tweet, text and tattle.

Frantz Fanon wrote in a time that did not have these sparkly links that connects us all; just as he wrote before the potential for planetary destruction: by pollution, drowning, warfare, was as yet not fully realized. We live now in a world of indefinite scale; calling upon the cleansing fire of violence to expiate sinning humanity risks global conflagration. Fanon, and Sartre, who introduced him to fellow Frenchmen, wrote in the extraordinary cusp century that was the last, and their prophecies are never more dated than when they look to Dien Bien Phu for dreamscapes. Many things changed in the ‘60s, and nothing evolves faster than war.  Read them, instead, for their diagnoses.

Seven years after Fanon’s masterpiece,The Wretched of the Earth, Parisians rose in revolt. You know, like they do.  Paris, a city Cocteau had mocked for “speaking only of itself”, rebelled in the most revelrous anarchy it was to witness in a hundred years. Sartre called May ’68 “Freedom in Action” in an interview, and this was a man of legendary standards for freedom. For all his doom-ridden jeering  (that fat, pale narcissist, Europe), it is Sartre who is the more optimistic of European prospects. As a European, he says in 1961, I steal the enemy’s book and out of it I fashion a remedy for Europe. What would the defeated 1968 man have made of the fact that his fire and brimstone resonates half a century later, when his ‘super-europe’ chugs smug on battlefield oil?

It is the moment of the boomerang: the third phase of violence; it comes back on us, it strikes us, and we do not realise any more than we did the other times that it’s we that have launched it. The liberals are stupefied; they admit that we were not polite enough to the natives, that it would have been wiser and fairer to allow them certain rights in so far as this was possible; they ask nothing better than to admit them in batches and without sponsors to that very exclusive club, our species; and now this barbarous, mad outburst doesn’t spare them any more than the bad settlers.

The Left at home is embarrassed; they know the true situation of the natives, the merciless oppression; they do not condemn their revolt, knowing full well that we have done everything to provoke it. But all the same, they think to themselves, there are limits; the guerillas should be bent of showing they are chivalrous; that would be the best way of showing they are men… let them endeavour by peaceful undertakings to deserve it. Our worthiest souls contain racial prejudice.

Sartre’s preface baits from the get-go, battling the basic hubris of settler ideology: that if you are the point of the discussion, you are its natural audience and final verdict. It is discomfiting, to go from subject to object, to be booted down from discussants to the discussed.  It is a gap that colonialism uses to devastating effect: know your enemy, for it is all grist to a divisive mill. The preface is bitter, defensive, romantic (The rebel’s weapon is the proof of his humanity). It is Sartre who is cruel:

For with us there is nothing more consistent than a racist humanism, since the European has only been able to be become a man through creating slaves and monsters.

It is hard to imagine Fanon ever topping that whopper.

To Fanon, an appraisal of Europe is instrumental: not apologetic, nor sympathetic, nor reactionary.  He could very well be dissecting alien life: not in the sense of  difference, but with indifference, implacability. When the book is angry, and it is angry plenty, it is the stoic scorn reserved for any blindly predatory beast. This is where they are headed, my brothers, he says: do you want to go there? I can only hope to find he equally appealed to his sisters. His romance, such as exists, is all reserved for Africa

Would Fanon, transplanted to the world circa 2010, agree with Robert Fisk that decolonisation was newspeak for recolonisation? Out with the old, in with the new, Fanon proclaims, bring on the tabula rasa. Little did he guess his ‘instantaneous translation’ would secure  and elevate crony collaborators over seditionists; translating henchmen, inadvertently or intentionally, to faraway masters. Even less did he suspect that it was embedded within a precise logic. All the brave ‘50s frogs, conservative and radical, Fanon and Sartre and Aron alike, croaked themselves hoarse about naked empire, and some chic boutique off the Champs d’Elysee stepped in to spin a fresh shielding glamour of gossamer lies. None of them foresaw the Algieria of today, locked as surely in an ignored orgy of violence in 2010 as it was in 1960. Or did they? For here is an uncanny sketch of the postcolonial terrorist:

This potential dead man has lost his wife and his children; he has seen so many dying men that he prefers victory to survival; others, not he, will have the fruits of victory; he is too weary of it all. But this weariness of the heart is the root of an unbelievable courage. We find our humanity on this side of death and despair; he finds it beyond torture and death. We have sown the wind, he is the whirlwind.

Their writing and indictment is as haunting now for the simple reason that it still applies.

The Dada Returns?

July 16th, 2010 by nepalidada

“…The voice of the Nepali Dada Party was once the voice of hope amidst this blog. But alas! The Nepali Dada Party decided to take a siesta out of sheer boredom. Reason for the boredom: a blog full of academic revelry where in even a son born to Einstein and Radioactive Curie would have been progressively bored, depressed, manically suicidal and finally fallen asleep.”

“…The Nepali Dada party believes that change must start at the top! The revolution must begin in the mind and proceed down to the feet. We must embrace the bourgeoisie and paternalistic media and stab them in the back with a swiss army knife…”

“…Thus, The Nepali Dada Party is proud to announce its latest awareness campaign: Let life not be a mistake! Let it be a cistern!”

- heard by a Nepali Dada Activist cum Journalist at the Nepali Dada Party’s retreat in X-Bar Restaurant with Dance, Shower and Soap.

Land of the not-so-pure

July 14th, 2010 by Urooj Zia

Urooj Zia writes about Pakistan’s recent categorisation as the most porn-hungry country on Google.com

Picture courtesy longislandfilm.com

Picture courtesy longislandfilm.com

Google has ranked Pakistan number 1 in the world in searches for pornographic terms, outranking every other country in the world in searches-per-person for certain sex-related content, according to a recent FoxNews report.

One could laugh this off, but what comes next is fairly disturbing. Secret ‘bestial’ passions apparently run high (and deep… and wild) in Pakistan. According to Google, the country has, since 2004, ranked number one in the world for per-person searches for ‘horse sex’. Pakistan has thumbed its nose at the world for per-person searches for ‘donkey sex’ since 2007, and ‘dog sex’ since 2005. One also worries about the citizens, especially women, living in a country which left the rest of the world behind between 2004 and 2009 in its quest for ‘rape pictures’ on the internet. Children are also of interest: between 2004 and 2007, and then again in 2009, users from Pakistan ranked number 1 in the search for ‘child sex’.

One would think that a country where courts went haywire in May this year – and threatened a repeat performance a month later – by banning more than a thousand webpages, including giants such as Facebook and Youtube, for ‘offensive’ and ‘blasphemous’ content, would be more vigilant when it comes to pornography. Not a chance. ‘We have orders only to ban blasphemous content. We’ll deal with pornography if and when we have the orders to do so. We don’t have any such orders yet,’ Khurram Mehran, the public relations officer for the Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA), had said back in May.

In the public space in Pakistan, young couples are harassed by the police and prosecuted under the law even if they hold hands or hug. Small wonder then that hormone-tortured young adults turn to the interwebs. In the wake of the FoxNews report, one can almost imagine the local religiocrats taking to the streets, blaming the internet, Jews, Christians, Hindus, RAW, Mossad, the CIA, and their aunts for the ‘declining morals of our youth’, completely disregarding the fact that the users in question searched for what they did voluntarily. Death to the infidel internet!

In retrospect though, I actually hope the PTA and other random authorities and officials concerned don’t overreact to the news report (which, incidentally, has been picked up and used widely by several Southasian media outlets) and block online pornography in Pakistan. For starters, it would definitely make the lives of women – especially working women – in the country even more miserable. At the moment, twisted minds (and going by what Google has to say, there seem to be quite a few of those in Pakistan) find an outlet for their random fetishes (bestiality!) in free porn which they can watch online or download, complete with viruses, trojans, and other assorted bugs. If their quest for ‘rape pictures’ or ‘child sex’ is suddenly blocked off, one can only imagine the amount of harassment – and worse – that women will be subjected to in the public space. To top it all, it’s not like the courts are very cooperative when it comes to women’s rights – the conviction rate for rape cases in Pakistan is almost negligible; and many incidents aren’t even reported for fear of being stigmatised and ostracised. She ‘asked for it’, after all, didn’t she? So goes the inference, oftentimes.

For the sake of the women of the country, then, if nothing else: Dear PTA, please let porn be. As for the disturbing Google searches, Ass-oholics Anonymous, anyone?

— Urooj Zia is the Assistant Editor (web) at Himal Southasian.

‘No Matter Where You Go, There You Are’

July 12th, 2010 by richardb

Richard Boyle on travel, travellers, tourists, and everything in between.

Bookmark and Share

One of my favourite travel writers, who happens to belong to the Indian diaspora, is Oxford-born Pico Iyer, the son of Brahmin Raghavan N Iyer, a philosopher and theosophist, and the religious scholar Nandini Nanak Meht. I have met Pico twice – in 2006, when he came to Sri Lanka to write a feature on the country’s political situation for Time magazine, and in 2008, when we both participated at the Galle Literary Festival.

Pico has written a number of travel books, many of them concerning Southasia, including The Lady and the Monk (1992), Falling Off the Map (1994), Cuba and the Night Quartet (1995), Tropical Classical (1998), Global Soul (2000) – ‘an astonishing and amusing view of the globalisation of East and West, as the author beholds how cultures fuse without completely losing their identities’ – Video Night in Kathmandu (2001) – ‘on the often bizarre effects of Western influences on the Far East’ – Sushi in Bombay, Jetlag in LA (2002), and The Open Road: The Global Journey of the Fourteenth Dalai Lama (2008).

Of all his writings, what captured my attention most was a perceptive quotation from his Foreword to Wanderlust (2000), a collection of travel writings: ‘We travel, initially, to lose ourselves; and we travel, next, to find ourselves. We travel to open our hearts and eyes and learn more about the world than our newspapers will accommodate. We travel to bring what little we can, in our ignorance and knowledge, to those parts of the globe whose riches are differently dispersed. And we travel, in essence, to become young fools again – to slow time down and get taken in, and fall in love once more.’

Another quotation that caught my eye was a comment on the difference between tourist and traveller: ‘Though it’s fashionable nowadays to draw a distinction between the “tourist” and the “traveller”, perhaps the real distinction lies between those who leave their assumptions at home, and those who don’t. Among those who don’t, a tourist is just someone who complains, “Nothing here is the way it is at home”, while a traveller is one who grumbles, “Everything here is the same as it is in Cairo” – or Cuzco or Kathmandu. It’s all very much the same.’

These quotations inspired me to search for other quotable views on travel down the centuries. For instance, an early commentator on the subject was philosopher Lao Tzu in the 6th century BC, whose ‘A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step’ has become a classic, and has even resulted in a modern rendering – ‘A journey of a thousand miles begins with a cash advance’ – by an unknown wit. Lao Tzu was also responsible for other pithy quotes such as ‘The further one goes the less one knows’ and ‘A good traveller has no fixed plans and is not intent on arriving’.

The Roman poet Horace, writing in the last century BC, had doubts about the value of tourism: ‘They change their clime, not their frame of mind, who rush across the sea.’ On the other hand, St Augustine of Hippo opined four centuries later: ‘The world is a book and those who do not travel read only one page.’

Moving forward to the 17th century, Francis Bacon in his Essays explains the difference between young and old travellers: ‘Travel, in the younger sort, is a part of education; in the elder, a part of experience. He that travelleth into a country before he hath some entrance into the language, goeth to school, and not to travel.’

The latter part of the 18th century was called the Age of Johnson, so it is not surprising that Samuel Johnson was responsible for several memorable travel quotes as reported by his biographer, James Boswell, in his Life of Johnson. One concerns the need for the traveller to be mentally well-prepared: ‘So it is in travelling; a man must carry knowledge with him, if he would bring home knowledge’, and, ‘A man who has not been in Italy, is always conscious of an inferiority, from his not having seen what it is expected a man should see.’ However, my favourite Johnson quote – and the world’s it seems – is ‘Worth seeing, yes; but not worth going to see,’ which was written about the Giant’s Causeway in County Antrim, Northern Ireland.

The 19th century was fertile. ‘It is not worthwhile to go around the world to count the cats in Zanzibar,’ declared Henry David Thoreau in 1854, not realising that 150 years later, that’s exactly what some people would find worthwhile. Francis Kilvert, Welsh vicar and diarist, derided his countrymen (and some countrywomen too I suppose) when he wrote in 1870: ‘Of all noxious animals, too, the most noxious is a tourist. And of all tourists, the most vulgar, ill-bred, offensive and loathsome is the British tourist.’

Robert Louis Stevenson confessed in Travels with a Donkey (1879): ‘For my part, I travel not to go anywhere, but to go. I travel for travel’s sake. The great affair is to move.’ However, Stevenson’s best-known quote is ‘To travel hopefully is a better thing than to arrive, and the true success is labour’ from Virginibus Puerisque (1881).

The 20th century began to produce references with meaning for the contemporary traveller. For example, Noel Coward’s ‘But why, oh why, do the wrong people travel, when the right people stay at home?’ is a sentiment well understood today.

Since the 1960s, there has existed a belief that personal growth should ideally be gained in travel, but as George Moore comments in The Brook Kerith (1916), ‘A man travels the world in search of what he needs and returns home to find it’.

‘Travel broadens the mind’ is a proverb dating from the early 20th century. GK Chesterton’s 1921 comment on it is a significant travel quote, too: ‘They say travel broadens the mind; but you must have the mind.’

Katherine Mansfield revealed her need for ultimate planning when she wrote in her diary in 1922: ‘Whenever I prepare for a journey I prepare as though for death. Should I never return, all is in order.’

Antoine de St Exupery’s ‘He who would travel happily must travel light’ rubs shoulders well with Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s ‘Let your memory be your travel bag’. Henry Miller’s ‘One’s destination is never a place, but a new way of seeing things’ harmonises with Marin Buber’s ‘All journeys have secret destinations of which the traveller is unaware’.

My penultimate reference, by Nancy Mitford from The Pursuit of Love (1945), is prejudiced and chauvinistic, so it must stand on its own: ‘Abroad is unutterably bloody and foreigners are fiends.’

Which leaves me to reveal what I think is the most succinct travel reference of all time: ‘No matter where you go, there you are.’ Despite its currency, the origins of the phrase are uncertain. Possibly it was resurrected in modern times from Thomas à Kempis’ Imitation of Christ (c.1440): ‘So, the cross is always ready and waits for you everywhere. You cannot escape it no matter where you run, for wherever you go you are burdened with yourself. Wherever you go, there you are.’ Perhaps it was engendered by the spirit of the Sixties. Carl Franz’s People’s Guide to Mexico (1972) contains the phrase, for instance.

— Richard Boyle is a contributing editor for Himal Southasian.

A method in apology

July 11th, 2010 by admin

Meher Ali on Jairam Ramesh’s apology for the government’s role, 23 years ago, in the clandestine transportation of toxic waste from the Union Carbide plant to a TSD.

Bookmark and Share

Jairam Ramesh, India’s Union minister of state for environment, apologised on Sunday. ‘Whoops!’ he said. The Madhya Pradesh government secretly transported 40 tonnes of toxic waste from the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal to a Treatment, Storage and Disposal (TSD) facility in Indore in 2008, at a time when the curfew was imposed on the riot-affected city, the Times of India reported.

What do you say to that? ‘Go Ramesh!’ ‘Champion of transparency!’ ‘Of course you are not to be blamed. We agree, you were not the environment minister at that time, so environment was probably not one of your concerns.’

So what if 23 years ago, the country shook from the impact of the Bhopal gas tragedy. So what if the government that you work for has treated the victims of the tragedy with little more than contempt. So what that the state and central governments have both tried, with all their might, to brush Union Carbide’s role in the environment disaster, under the carpet?

You probably knew about it though didn’t you? For how long?

What happens now? Another Bhopal in the making, because we know it’ll probably take you another 20 years to shift the waste (clandestinely) to some other obscure place, or maybe you’ll wait for a riot to do the trick.

The UPA-II, it seems, is getting more arrogant by the day. Instead of chalking out a clear plan of action for disposing of toxic waste which has been in the country since 1984; instead of holding those responsible for the disaster accountable; instead of using this environmental disaster as a lesson in how to avoid similar tragedies, the government says, ‘Sorry! Whoops!’

Would it have been too much to expect the environment minister to have a plan of action on how he plans to now get rid of the toxic waste in Pithampur accompany his apology? Would it have been too much to ask him to explain how exactly he came to know of this and when? (Of course he would have to tell us the truth, which may be a stretch).

We want to know why the central and state government were working so hard to cover this up, not just in the 1980s but until 2008. We want to know how many Indian citizens’ lives equal that of Warren Anderson? We want to know if the government will take environmental hazards seriously or if it is waiting for another one to happen. When will it chalk out a clear plan of action with regard to compensation for victims of environmental disasters, protocols for cleaning up and emergency responses to such disasters?

We want to know if the government is serious about governance and if it values people over profits. The last point is important, because if it does not, as we have seen in the past; if the government is callous and irresponsible towards its people, if it treats corporations as kings and the people as ‘collateral damage’ in its quest to become a ’superpower,’ then the people may not accept. Whoops!

— The writer is the Assistant Editor (print) at Himal Southasian.

Where the Green Ants Dream

July 5th, 2010 by nandiniramachandran

An Allegory for Niyamgiri and the Dongria Kondh.

Green Ants is a movie that can be interpreted at various levels- it can be constructed as a classic tale of the human and environmental costs of human greed, as a study of the encroaching tides of western rationality upon profoundly different ways of thought or as an indictment of a civilisation that respects no other. At its heart is a question: can you really consider yourself civilised if you cannot understand another person’s perspective, or at the very least respect it?

The story of green ants is a tale about corporate profit clashing with aboriginal beliefs. It is, in some ways, the story of advancing capitalism. Capitalism has always laid waste what came before it- whether it was the “red” Indian or the brown one, the yellow man or the black one. The white man, they say, was blind to his own history and imported his blindness to the colonies. This was done by subordinating, undermining and dividing cultures with the ruthlessness only the religion of profiteering can muster. How can it be otherwise? If all is fair where money is to be made, how easy it must be to poison societies where wealth is respected but not worshipped. Historically, imperial ambitions have always mixed well with religious fervour: the only difference in the modern world is that money is the new false god.

In Herzog’s movie, a mining company wants to excavate the holy ground of a group of Australian aborigines: they believe that the land that is to be mined is where the green ants, upon whom existence depends, dream; and upon that dream rests reality. On the face of it, it is irrational and absurd, but really is it any more absurd that ordering existence for the benefit of the unqualified zeal for profit? Than unrestrainedly exploiting resources, when the finiteness of them is beyond question? The “American dream” is today what constructs reality- and it is no more tangible (and some would argue possible) than the green ants’ dream. This film, to some extent, exposes it for the myth it is by deconstructing other myths that have sustained other cultures in their fight for survival.

The sharpest voice protesting capitalism today says that it steals from the poor to reward the rich. The latest recession, for instance, will hit aid to dependant Africa and the sundry poor of the world worse than anyone else, because they are the most expendable. It was caused because of the recklessness of big business and banks; yet they received a trillion dollars in stimulus packages. This is a story about how stealing from the poor, the unrepresented, the helpless, is the easiest and quickest crime in history and one that has always borne rich dividends. It is made easy by dismissing their qualms and their claims as irrational, backward, irrelevant and placing them against “real” truths, like the fact that the world needs to mine constantly to support a wasteful and extravagant system. It is made easy by the fact that the privileged of the world- economically, culturally, socially privileged- are so few and yet so powerful, and the only ones that have the resources to be able to stick together. And the fact that they disguise their minority so effectively by forcing the majority to fight between themselves for scraps. In fights for survival, metaphysical questions about the “system” and its validity are a luxury. It is only when one’s basic beliefs about existence are questioned that one begins to consider actually fighting, and by then it is often too late.

Raajneeti and The Mahabharata

June 28th, 2010 by Vijay Vikram

By Vijay Vikram

I have never liked Ranbir Kapoor or Katrina Kaif. So, it was with some trepidation that I decided to watch Raajneeti. It was recommended both by friends and family and one gentleman even mentioned that one of the characters reminded him of me. The film also happened to be about one of the subjects dearest to my heart: Indian politics. I also had the distinct feeling that it might not be crap. So, on the last day of my trip to India, I went along to see it.

The first thing I must mention about the film is that it borrows liberally from The Mahabharata. Nay, it’s based on it. What better inspiration could there be for a tale about Indian family politics? It was a pleasure to be able to identify and compare Raajneeti’s characters with their mythological antecedents. Some scenes from the epic are even unselfconsciously reproduced in the film. Perhaps the most memorable one is near the end where Nana Patekar, assuming the role of 21st Century political Krishna prevails upon Arjun (Ranbir Kapoor) to put aside any pretensions to honour and family ties and satisfy the requirements of political morality.

This is a theme that runs through the entire film. The idea that politics and statecraft is a plane upon itself and therefore mandates its own set of rules and morality. In this sense, it is reminiscent of Machiavelli.

(As an aside, I should point out that Nana Patekar’s character, Brij Gopal comes across as an amalgam of Shakuni and Krishna – which, needless to say, is a stimulating combination)

I was instinctively drawn to Ajay Devgan’s character (Suraj Kumar) who is unambiguously based on Karan from The Mahabharata. There seems to be an aura of badassery that permeates his character. Suraj, just as Karan in The Mahabharata embodies a will to power, a clear talent and of course an inevitable pathos. Just like his mythological antecedent, he remains loyal to Duryodhana till the very end.

Manoj Bajpai is the actor tasked with playing Duryodhana doppelganger in the film. And I must say that Bajpai is grossly under-utilised. He is forced to play quite a pathetic, unidimensional character and none of his versatility is on show. I have always felt that Manoj Bajpai got a raw deal from the Hindi film industry. He has all the potential to be a an unconventional leading man (better than Ranbir Kapoor at any rate). If somebody of similar stock like Irfan Khan is allowed his time in the sun, surely there’s space for Manoj Bajpai.

On an aesthetic note, I really must applaud the high production values of 21st Century Hindi Cinema. The wardrobe, props and locations were flawless. The dialogue was careful to utilise political Hindi, which was a nice touch. In many ways, Hindi cinema has come of age. The film industry has started making what I suppose can be loosely termed as ’social interest’ films. More importantly, Bollywood betrays a sense of confidence and brashness that is infectious.

Having said that, Raajneeti is not free from the usual idiosyncrasies of Hindi cinema. There is of course the exotic love interest and the badly done, obligatory sex and kissing scenes that no Hindi film seems to be able to do without these days. Still, these are forgivable flaws.

In any case, I would like to end by making two observations:

1) I’ve always felt that the moral imperative in The Mahabharata lay with Karan. It is him that I am drawn to and it is him that I have empathy with. It is he who should win and it is he who deserves the gaddi. In this fashion, both The Mahabharata and Raajneeti end unsatisfactorily for me.

2) Raajneeti was only released by the Censor Board after the removal of a few scenes from the film. I imagine these scenes were deemed offensive to the sensibilities of the Gandhi family. I would love to find out what they were.