On paper the idea must have seemed unbeatable. A gamer creates a kickass game to thrill his son, the evil one breaks out of the game and pursues the son, the father steps in to save the son, and the day.
There are many planes on which the idea must have been appealed to Shah Rukh Khan, the dethroned King Khan of Bollywood (Shocked? But it’s true: Aamir Khan has taken over the classes and the collections, while Salman Khan has walked away with the masses).
At the height of Amar Singh’s lackies gheraoing his mansion Mannat in Mumbai with the family inside, SRK had said he will do anything to protect his children. I presume when Anubhav Sinha approached him with the script, the part about G.One protecting his son must have leapt out at the actor.
Everyone knows, thanks his media saturation skills, that SRK is an owl who stays awake at night. So does the film’s G.One. Notch another one for Anubhav Sinha.
Again, thanks his media saturation skills everyone knows that SRK is a gamer, a geek in Bollywood clothes. So is the (thankfully) short-lived caricature of a hero Shekhar Subramaniam or whatever. Notch yet another one for the director.
In his 40s SRK seems to have entered a maturer, mellower phase in his life. I don’t know him, have never met him, my only interaction with him being the once I spoke to him on the phone for an interview for Rediff.com. Thus I base my claim on his last few films – Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, Billu, My Name Is Khan and now Ra.One, where the focus is on the goodness of the self. Like other stars SRK too wants to leave a legacy, but this time for his children, one where the goodness of heart triumphs. It is what his parents left for him and, I suspect, beyond all the wealth he will leave behind this is the legacy he wants his children to treasure the most.
This is a message from our legends as well, so (again I presume) when Anubhav Sinha made his pitch SRK must have felt, what better time to release the film than Diwali, which in the Hindi-speaking parts of the country is celebrated with Raavan’s downfall and elsewhere in India with other legends of good winning over evil.
With the basics in place, the challenge would have been to translate the grand vision on to celluloid, after which SRK’s money and marketing skills would take over.
Other givens in place like script etc, three elements need to be in sync for a successful film. The director’s vision, the lead actor’s vision, and the producer’s vision. The last is commercial, return on investment, while the first two are creative, and it is essential that the director’s vision mesh with the actor’s, or at least subsume it.
Ra.One’s fault number one, as I see it, was that the director and the lead actor had different visions. The director’s vision was to tell his story, and SRK’s was to get his ‘message’ across. Somewhere somehow they did not sync with each other. So at the end of the film, SRK’s message comes across, but the story flops in the telling.
Ra.One’s fault number two was that there was no emotional connect with the audience. A superhero is out to save the world, the established order which has you and me, members of the audience, in it and we need to feel the urgency of being saved. The unsuperhero G.One’s goal, on the other hand, is merely to save his family from an equally inept villain. Who cares!
Ra.One’s fault number three was the poor FX. If this tackiness is the level of FX India’s biggest movie budget can buy, then I suggest Bollywood return to more modest but effective story-telling. The last Hindi superhero film, Kkkrish, must have been made on a fraction of Ra.One’s budget but boasted better FX and worked just fine – and not merely because Hrithink Roshan is a better looking actor.
Ra.One’s fault number four was that the hero is very un-hero. Oh, G.One has the usual charm that SRK brings to his characters, plus the dimples, but you need to fight out there, not flee all the time. A superhero with no real super skills apart from whirling like a ceiling fan etc? And to think that SRK turned down Shankar’s Robot to make this film!
Plus, if I may make a suggestion, can SRK please bring back his original dance director Farah Khan? I don’t know what went wrong between them, but she ‘knew’ SRK and the dance steps reflected that. Here G.One does the hip steps that seem so alien to the SRK we know and love on screen.
Ra.One’s fault number five was that it insults audience intelligence too much. All films do, but within limits. Here there seems to be no end to it. Just one instance: Kareena returns to
So what is my takeaway from this most expensive abomination to hit our screens? That even SRK can fail; that while sex continues to sell, SRK doesn’t.
Finally, my reaction as a Tamilian to the first Tamil character essayed by SRK: funny and irreverent so typical of the man, but there’s a inbuilt danger in caricatures. Which is that the caricature stays on in the mind, not the character. Which happens with Ra.One, which is also its biggest fault.
And as PS, let me rub it in as a Tamilian. Rivals may diss Sachin Tendulkar to score points during their book release, but at the end of the day his batting record is there for everyone to see. Similarly, you can caricature Tamils no end, but at the end of the day Rajnikanth’s Endhiran collections are there for all to see.
Paithikkara!
Ra.One: So who is the paithikkara now?
October 27th, 2011 1 comment »
An epitaph too soon for the print media?
September 20th, 2011 2 comments »The obituaries were all done and dusted in the mid-1990s, when 24×7 news, as the television broadcasts came to be called, came alive in The obituaries were pulled out from dust jackets 10 years later, when breaking news on the internet, of which rediff.com was the pioneer, took hold. And yet, a casual look at the local newsstand will show one – judging by the number of glossies and newspapers in various languages adorning the kiosk — that the print industry is not just alive but also kicking, and kicking well at that, in But the Cassandras were not entirely wrong. In fact, their fears were right, only it didn’t apply to Perhaps the Cassandras can be pardoned for their fears of a replay in It’s boring to be hit with figures, so here’s a mere small fact. According to the Indian Readership Survey 2010’s Q4 findings, The Times of India, the country’s largest newspaper, added a whopping 3.39 lakh readers in the previous one year. Its total readership now stood at 1.37 crore. And this growth has come at a time when there is immense worry that television’s 24×7 news and the internet would kill off the print industry. And whatever is left of it would be taken care of by the strengthening social network phenomenon. Before looking at the role of social networking vis a vis the media, let us first consider that, despite their impressive reach, the print media is far from saturation point. Neither does the English media, collectively, reach the entire English-speaking population of In fact, Which also explains the number of new publications that mushroom across the horizon, each trying to fill the awning gap in the reader-publication ecosystem. I was still part of the print media when the television news channels went 24×7 over 15 years ago, and the fear in the newsroom as well as the top echelons of the national newspaper chain then was real. Why would readers turn to the newspaper the next morning when they have already been familiarized with the day’s events by the TV channels? In these 15 years, the print media has had not only to cope with the TV assault but also the internet. If the TV grappled for your attention at home, the internet did the same at work. So much so, by the next morning one is already aware of what has happened. Yes, the worst as feared by that publication’s editorial bosses 15 years ago has happened, it has slid from its position but that was due more to internal factors than any external threats. So is the print media surviving, and in some cases even flourishing, because reading is a ‘good habit’ as has been dinned into us Indians since the time we crawled out of the cradle? Or, does the print media owe its position to the fact that regardless of immediacy and other instant factors, there is really nothing to replace newsprint for depth of coverage and localization? Sceptics are welcome to disagree with my theory, but I daresay it is the latter. Sure, we devour news on TV and the internet, but we still like to validate what we see/hear/read in newsprint too. In this limited sense, this is true convergence of media where television and internet give you the newsbreaks and related stuff, and the print completes the circle with its indepth coverage which, unlike TV at least, is not perishable. To take my theory forward, the publications that flounder in the face of television and internet news do so not because print is passé but because they are prisoners of the past formula. For some, catering to the Gen X reader means having more soft features at best, and T&A and sex and sleaze at worst. Which, if you pause to think about it, is insulting the young reader. I think there is always room for good journalism that either anticipates news events or dictates the course of the news discourse. Which, in simpler terms, means hard-hitting, exclusive stuff – which is what one was taught all those years ago when one started out, so what has changed? Nothing, really, if you think about it. The emergence of electronic media (ie, TV and internet) represents an opportunity for the print media to rediscover some basic truths about journalism after having lost its way in the lure of commerce, and the ones who survive are the ones who have seen the light. The ones who see the new mediums as a threat can only have their backs to the wall. Which is more or less the case with social networking, the umbrella phrase used to refer to blogs, Facebook, Twitter, Google Plus and numerous other web sites that keep your social life cracking but virtual. To posit that the burgeoning of blogs etc threaten/displace the traditional journalist is a bit like saying that LinkedIn would replace the HR managers. Huh!? Sure, in many cases, tweets and blogs give you the newsbreak — for instance the plane that landed on the But there the matter ends. By the sheer serendipity of being present at ground zero, the tweeter or blogger can provide one the newsbreak, but little beyond that. For instance, the Abbottabad blogger is neither equipped to nor capable of bringing you further coverage of the Osama operation; for that you need professional journalists. The other use of social media is its social nature. Whether it is the Arab Spring or the Anna Hazare movement, the social tools are handy to spread the word and organize, a role which the media is not equipped to play, nor should it and end up becoming a player itself. But the same social media are convenient troughs for the real media to feed off from, to follow the events as they break and to report on them. To conclude from the success of the social media that the days of the real media are numbered, is carrying things a bit too far. Social media has its role, as does the media. They intersect each other very often, but neither is capable of replacing each other. If the print media is far from saturation point, similar is the case with the electronic media. Despite the hoohaa about
Cassandras have been crowing over the imminent demise of the print news medium ever since I joined it in 1985 (and possibly earlier, too).
9/11: Memories of another day
September 12th, 2011 No comments »The plaintive wail of a woman rang through the train compartment as we were hurtling through the conurbations dotting In the distant horizon we could see the Twin Towers — my last sight of the world’s tallest buildings till then, seared into my soul for eternity — and was that a wisp of smoke towards the top of it or was it mere will-o’-the-wisp playing games with one’s eyesight, and distant memory now? I couldn’t be too sure, as I pressed myself against huge bodies lining the glass windows, all eager to catch a glimpse of what had happened. ‘I swear, I saw the plane fly into the Towers,’ somewhere upfront the woman kept up her wail. ‘Fuck, it was a plane, my god!’ A plane? Flying into the I don’t think anyone in that compartment heading to work on what seemed just another, normal, balmy morning, thought it would be a terror attack, that some twisted minds from thousands of miles away harbouring hatred for what the US of A stood for would actually undertake a covert operation using the very freedoms they abhorred so much to bring the country to its knees. Now a plane flying into the towering structures was not such an impossibility as it seems. It had happened earlier, to the previous record-holder for the world’s tallest structure, when a military aircraft had flown into the Till that day, every time I visited For me, coming from the land that till then seemed like the terrorists’ favourite playing ground, the security restrictions had become an intrinsic part of my life. Heck, as recently as four months earlier, when the family saw me off at Mumbai’s airport, the goodbyes were said on the road outside the terminal, among honking vehicles emitting smoke and other passengers wheeling their bulky trolleys. They continue to be said in similar fashion in our airports. In contrast, when I saw off my boss at JFK, I walked with him till the boarding gate, hung around well after the plane left, the marvel of it refusing to leave me even now, a decade later. That, I realized, was freedom. That, I now know, was freedom from fear. The world’s sole superpower had little to fear till then, and I had gotten carried away by that attitude too. It was not just external fearlessness, it was internal as well. When I was browsing through a merchandise store off Broadway, looking for knickknacks to take back home for family and friends, I was startled to find one item on the shelves. Toilet paper. Nothing unusual about it, the tissue after all is as inherent to American lavatorial custom as water is to ours, but this one was different, which was why it featured in that store. It was a stars and stripes toilet paper. Now everyone knows that Americans wear their flag on their sleeve, along with their heart. But for poor me, coming from a land where the tricolour is an object of veneration and awe, this was simply too much to bear. I gingerly approached the shopkeeper and asked him if it was okay to sell such an item, won’t there be, errr, trouble? I got my answer from his quizzical expression. I realized this was complete freedom, from fear of any kind. Every time I would see someone off at JFK, I was amazed by the freedom to just saunter all over the structure. Ah, but these guys have never been hit by terrorism, let it happen to them, then we will see what they do. No, this was not a wish, as a citizen of another liberal democracy one loved As the announcer’s voice cut through the clamour in the train compartment that 11th day of September, 2001, never once did it cross my mind that the T-word had crossed the The train we were on would not reach its terminus, Penn station in We knew something was wrong, but just what? It was not yet 10 am. Cell phones, that marvel of the 21st century, were fished out all across, and the result was virtually the same. No network. Was it jammed by an edgy administration, or was it a case of overload? No one knew, but everyone was worried. The order in the midst of what was a chaotic situation was the most amazing thing I saw around me that day. As trains disgorged hundreds of commuters on the platforms, there was no shoveling and jostling, which is what I am accustomed to in my long years in No one can enter the city. But, but, I had an edition to attend to, it was deadline time and the newspaper had to be sent to the printing press. If all men suffer from the delusion that their job is a world-saving one, journalists are the terminal case. And I was on deathbed. I approached a National Guard soldier, fished out my worthless press identity (issued in He heard me out, I will grant him that much, but little else. As I saw happy hordes hailing cabs and speeding home, liberated from the thought of suffering another workday, I decided to hang around. Whatever had happened will pass soon, once they realise that it was a flying accident and lift the restrictions. I had a job to do, for Chrissake, besides, what will I do by myself in my sad house in I hung around, past 11, 12, and 1 pm. If the National Guard fellow was bugged by my entreaties to be let into NYC every half hour or so, he didn’t show it, even though I could see they were all tense as hell. There was no sign of the cell phone network reviving either, and I wondered what my colleagues and family back in Finally I decided to call it a day and head back home in the afternoon. As I switched on the television and realized the enormity of 9/11, I sunk into disbelief and despair. A few weeks later, as I flew back to
‘Oh my god, look at that, a plane, a plane!’
We the feeble
August 17th, 2011 No comments »The economy, touted as the toast of the world (or at least that part of the world that matters to the articulate, middle class, affluent Indian), is not on a roll anymore it seems. It is no coincidence that social activist Anna Hazare’s campaign targets, and in turn appeals to, this burgeoning section of India that is concerned as much with the decimal points in the GDP growth and the dollar-rupee tango as by the aam aadmi’s railway coach being left behind by the chugging engine of growth. Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, in his statement in the Lok Sabha on Wednesday, too directly appealed to this segment of the population, perhaps knowing well its fickleness. Why else would he slip in this paragraph in a speech devoted to Hazare’s campaign: ‘ This middle class beast everyone courts is a strange one. Its prosperity since 1991, when the Pearly Gates to prosperity were thrown open by Finance Minister Manmohan Singh, is accompanied by a gnawing sense of guilt over the ones left behind. It seeks affirmation it is neither responsible for nor unconcerned about the mind-numbing poverty around its towers of wealth. Twenty years later, in a cruel twist of irony combined with fate, the chicken from that liberalisation have come home to roost when its chief architect has been elevated to the post of prime minister. The middle class that benefited from 1991 is very different from the one that existed previously. Then the Indian felt himself to be in a position of disadvantage vis-à-vis the world outside and was happier looking inside. Heck, even But the Indian since then is a different creature. Thanks to the freeing up of controls across the board he has seen the world (if not entirely, at least the parts of it that matter to him), he follows international events across media, and realises that with purchasing power the world is indeed flat. Thanks to his global perspective, or looking outside, it has not taken him long to realise that he has been short-changed, the miasma of prosperity that is around him has lulled him as the elected representatives were on a looting spree. It can be no one’s case, least of all mine, that corruption is an offshoot of 1991. And it certainly is not my case that corruption can be eradicated. It can be contained, yes. So I am all in agreement with Prime Minister Dr Singh when he says there is no magic wand to deal with the issue. The only problem I have with that statement is, just what were you up to, Mr Prime Minister, for seven years in office? Did it need an old man in a not-in-use-anymore Gandhi cap for your government to realise that middle The Congress party, that grand old party of India’s freedom movement spearheaded by Mahatma Gandhi, has moved so far away from the Father of the Nation’s ideals that anyone laying claim to Gandhiji’s legacy strikes terror deep in its heart, petrifying it, rendering it incapable of coherent thought and action. It happened in the mid-1970s when a zephyr called Jayaprakash Narayan turned into the tempest for Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. Against brute State force, Loknayak crystallised the change that Indians then sought: true democracy. With the benefit of hindsight we now know that the Congress could have dealt with him differently, but power often robs you of one critical faculty needed to retain it: clarity of thought. More than a generation has passed since then, and kids who grew up in the shadow of that revolution, probably watching their parents wax eloquent about JP (mine did, for sure), are at the forefront of a new revolution. The Congress government then had unleashed its howitzers against people’s power, and paid the price in the elections that followed. As of Wednesday, there has been little evidence that this Congress government has learnt from history – its leading lights of today all had a ringside view of events as they unfolded then, surely they know better? Critics argue that Hazare is no JP, and they are probably right. But even they cannot deny that a raging conflagration is set off by a trifling spark. Unlike JP’s revolution, Hazare doesn’t enjoy the undivided Opposition’s trust, nor is he a unifying force behind the non-UPA political spectrum. But what he lacks in numbers, Hazare has made up in terms of reach thanks to media, social and otherwise. But Hazare is not the issue, and the government should not make him into one. Rather, it should focus on the issue he has voiced: corruption that is depriving people of the mind-boggling welfare funds but for which You can argue that a mere few thousands are chanting Hazare’s mantra of change, and be right. But ignore it, dismiss it, brush it aside as inconsequential – as this government’s spokespersons have been doing all along, just as they belittled JP all those years ago — and you will be guilty of turning a blind eye to an incendiary spark.
At the best of times
Because Shikshan is not a sexy title for a Prakash Jha film
August 17th, 2011 1 comment »Driving past Prateeksha, I saw a posse of policemen guarding actor Amitabh Bachchan’s corner bungalow in Juhu, in anticipation of pro- or anti- reservationists creating trouble. Gosh, I thought, it must be an explosive film. And, any follower of news knows that over the last week there have been many angry voices against the film. Now I don’t know who director Prakash Jha’s PR agent is; whoever it is, the person deserves kudos for the way hype has been created around the film when it clearly doesn’t warrant any of it. Nor does the film warrant a title like Aarakshan, which means reservations. The film is less about reservations and more about education and should rightly have been called Shikshan (education). But will the political class froth at the mouth over such a title? Will the media then cover the film in such great detail? No. Another PR coup, in selecting a sexy title. Ajay Devgan must thank his lucky stars for not having the dates for regular director Jha, leading to Saif Ali Khan stepping in. On paper it must have seen like a stellar role, to play a Dalit which must have seemed novel for the latter given his blue blood, but in reality Saif has little to do in the film. He does an impressive turn in a confrontationist scene with Prateik (when he mouths that Humein mehinat ka paath padha rahe hain aap? dialogue), has a ball bashing up helpless guys in another scene, but on the whole Deepak Kumar the character is unconvincing. He goes missing for a while after taking a rickshaw presumably to the Truth be told, there is only one main character, played by Amitabh Bachchan as the principal Dr Prabhakar Anand, and everyone else is mere extra. As this is a character the thespian has played before, in Mohabattein, it taxes him little. Prateik, who impressed with his naturalness before the camera in Jaane Tu Yaa Jaane Na, seems out of sorts here. But what do you do when your character fades in and out of the script so! Deepika Padukone is no stranger to criticism of her acting prowess, which I always thought was unfair. I mean, how many Hindi films care for the heroine’s theatrics! As Amitabh’s daughter she does what is expected of her through the film, but when given the scene at the end that could shut her critics up, she flubs it badly. Dialogues are meant to be delivered, not spoken, she needs to be told. Manoj Bajpai plays the schemer yet again and does it with relish. Thankfully, he doesn’t have a change of heart at the end which is a relief. Because everyone else does! Saif reveres his principal, changes his mind, and changes his mind yet again. As does Prateik. Deepika walks out on her parents, and once outside has a quick change of heart. Saif goes to Cornell, has a change of heart, and comes back. The board of trustees has a change of heart and sacks their stellar principal. Through all this, one man stands firm, and that is Dr Prabhakar Anand. Everyone around him ultimately see that he was right and they were wrong, and all ends simplistically. On the whole, when a fine bunch of actors don’t impress you as you leave the auditorium, the director has to shoulder the blame. For not having the conviction in seeing the plot through and meandering into the next bylane. Granted, in a fractured society like Don’t the offspring of those who were denied access to education and a life with dignity for generations have a right to overthrow the inhuman yoke and seek their place in the sun? Of course they do. Shouldn’t merit be the ultimate yardstick in a society that is trying to build itself after centuries of subjugation? Of course it should. Alas, And any film that sets out to tackle such a topic needs to be nuanced, which Aarakshan clearly is not. At 20 reels could it have been shorter? Maybe, had it stuck to what it set out to do. The way it is done, Aarakshan feels like two films separated by the recess. After clobbering you with two songs in the first 30 minutes, making you dread if it will turn out to be a musical take on reservations, there’s a drought of songs after that. The Saif-Deepika romance is underdeveloped for fear of overshadowing the main story, which is fine. But their breakup and reunion happen too easily, like the climax which almost makes you guffaw.
Driving down to the preview theatre in the suburbs for a dekko of Prakash Jha’s Aarakshan, I heard on the FM station’s news break that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati has banned the film for two months in her state. Wow, I thought, must be an explosive film.
You can also read me here!
February 25th, 2011 No comments »Hi.
Reshuffle reflects PM’s style: subtlety, not noise
January 20th, 2011 1 comment »Social networking sites have their use. They give you a sense of public sentiment over any hot topic. But being majoritarian in nature, the debate often swings the way of those who speak the loudest. Listen to them, but not necessarily to take them as the vox populi.
If you don’t do that, on hearing the internet chatter you will tend to believe that the United Progressive Alliance government is rudderless, even clueless that it is rudderless, and lacks a strategy — all of which is proven by the reshuffle, inasmuch as that word applies to Wednesday’s portfolio reallocation exercise by the prime minister.
It can be no one’s case that UPA II is going about its task bright as a button, and it certainly isn’t mine either. The thumb of rule for governments is that their honeymoon phase lasts for one or two years, after which it descends into a holding operation till the next election is called or forced on it. The UPA II is unique in that it almost never had a honeymoon period with the electorate – which is a tragedy, considering the enormous goodwill that propelled it into office.
To know a government is to know its political compulsions. To know a cabinet shakeup is to know the prime minister.
We have known the UPA II for one and a half years now, and its political compulsions were sought to be given a sheen recently by Rahul Gandhi, the Congress general secretary who is anything but that. Coalition governments have their limitations, he said, in a sorry attempt at deflection of the all-round criticism UPA II has been subject to. For instance, following the Supreme Court’s observations on various issues involving the government, which have become a sort of a daily sermon, are an eye-opener. Never before has a government in India been lectured and harangued by the apex court in so regular a manner, which makes you wonder, just who is in charge?
That, in my opinion, is the problem behind UPA II. Things were okay with UPA I, because it was a surprise victory even for the Congress. The prime minister and his political superior, Congress president Sonia Gandhi, hit upon a modus vivendi that didn’t cut too much into each other’s space. So while he could focus on governance, she could focus on the party.
But things seem to have changed with the 2009 electoral victory. The Congress, surprise surprise, improved on its previous Lok Sabha tally, and the party bosses suddenly seem to have woken up to the fact that maybe, just maybe, it could improve further and reach a position where it would form the government on its own.
Inherent in that belief is that it would see the return of the Gandhi family to the top political job in the country.
The problems of UPA II, then, stem from the classic case of party vs government. It was all hunky-dory when the party had less numbers and therefore was less assertive. This doesn’t apply only to the government — it applies in equal measure to the Congress’s relations with its allies too. Hence the uneasy equations with its various partners, from the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam to the Nationalist Congress Party to the Trinamool Congress.
Indira Gandhi foresaw this and wore two hats, of prime minister and party president. So far Sonia Gandhi has resisted the impulse, choosing to be the power behind the throne instead. The irony cannot escape her, the prime minister or us: power can have only one source. When there are more, as it does now, it causes confusion at best and demoralisation at worst.
And the UPA II is at its worst phase now. If it does well, Sonia Gandhi gets the credit; if it fails, it will be laid at Manmohan Singh’s door. The soft-spoken prime minister was aware of this when he agreed to take up the job which had no other claimant. And Wednesday’s reallocation of portfolio reflects his style of operation.
I am not one of those fortunate enough to be on familiar terms with the prime minister or his office, that’s a privilege reserved for a few for whom the downside was revealed recently in tapped telephone conversations. I have encountered the incumbent only twice, both on overseas visits he made. During these visits, contrary to public perception that the media gets to wine and dine with the high and mighty, all you get are a few minutes of interacting up close with the prime minister.
But these are precious minutes, where you get to observe, and even confirm your perceptions. From what I believe and know, this prime minister is not given to pomp and show — not because he knows his job was given to him — but because that is simply not his style. So no overt displays of either style, or authority. Why use a howitzer when a kirpan is enough, that could easily be his motto.
So all those castigating the government for a feeble reshuffle are missing the point. Which is that the exercise was not meant to be anything more than a message. And the recipients for whom it was intended, have all got it. Just a few examples will suffice:
Sharad Pawar has retained agriculture, but has lost the crucial civil supplies ministry. Plus, his foe Vilasrao Deshmukh is now in his trajectory with rural development portfolio.
His party colleague Praful Patel has been given a leg up, but only after paying the price: civil aviation.
Kamal Nath has been moved out of highways to urban development.
Murli Deora gives up petroleum, gains corporate affairs.
MS Gill loses sports, turns number cruncher with statistics and programme implementation.
The Congress party’s interests have been kept in mind, too, with Sriprakash Jaiswal and Salman Khursheed, both from Uttar Pradesh, getting promoted to Cabinet rank.
You can always ask why did the prime minister not go the whole hog if his intention was to clean up his administration? Why have laggards and looters been allowed to remain?
It is for those who refuse to read the signs that Manmohan Singh issued a statement later that a more expansive exercise will be done after the Budget session of Parliament.
Why after the Budget session?
For the government, clearly, the first imperative is to tide over that period – already facing the combined Opposition ire and the threat of Jagan Reddy’s MPs pulling out and endangering the government, neither wisdom nor survival instinct advise the opening of a third front of disgruntled ministers by sacking them.
This, to me, fits in with the prime minister’s style. Another leader from another era I think said it better: Speak softly and carry a big stick. That’s what I think Dr Singh has done.
2010: A mandate betrayed
December 28th, 2010 1 comment »
As an ancient civilization that has seen vicissitudes go by with equanimity,
As India has hobbled along these last 63 years trying to keep its long overdue tryst with destiny, there have been times more often than one can remember when the promise has been betrayed by a class that pretends to serve but in reality is only self-serving.
So it is that even the most hardened optimists — like this writer — will always qualify their rosy outlook for India with the words, ‘But, then, you never know…’ – only because we know that since time immemorial the curse of this land has been its men of destiny who have repeatedly let it down.
But not even hardened experience could have prepared one for the slide in 2010 where a government that assumed power a year ago on the back of a mandate of hope has simply squandered away its reservoir of goodwill and betrayed the mass of expectations which fuelled it to power.
After all, this was supposed to be a government of the aam-aadmi. But the unfolding scams during the year, involving sums that simply boggle the mind, show yet again that when it comes to decisions the common man’s interest is not at the core of decision-making.
Every government has its quota of scams, some artificial, some inflated, and some true. What separates the good government from the bad is how it reacts when scams break, what counter-actions it takes to punish the guilty, to recover the loss to the nation and to put in measures to prevent a repetition in future. Anything less would be seen as being complicit in the financial skullduggery.
Alas, judging by this yardstick, the Manmohan Singh government has failed, and failed miserably. Consider the two humongous scams to hit the headlines during the year: the Commonwealth Games, and the 2G spectrum allocation. In both cases, the government first pretended the scam did not exist, then denied the extent of the scam, before ordering a probe that satisfied very few. Even now, it seems more set on silencing the Opposition’s furore than on bringing the guilty to book.
Naturally, the opposition parties from both sides of the political spectrum, the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Left parties, in an unprecedented act paralysed Parliament’s winter session with their demand for setting up a joint parliamentary committee probe into the 2G spectrum scam, a demand the government is loath to concede for reasons of its own, despite the prime minister likening himself to “Caesar’s wife”.
The irony could not have been starker. In the last six months of the year, leaders of the P5 nations — the
Yet, even as a new
That Indians have an ambivalent attitude towards corruption, is a given. We do not mind winking at it if we felt the government was also doing our work. The CWG and 2G spectrum scams have shattered this delusional sense of security. Both the Games and the spectrum scams involved aspects that didn’t touch the aam aadmi’s life. The former was about showcasing India’s arrival on the world stage by hosting its biggest international extravaganza to date, while the latter involved — simply put — selling of airwaves.
The widespread dismay is that while the aam aadmi was being passed off with homilies about lack of resources to elevate his life from the miserable to the tolerable, millions of rupees were seen to be siphoned off by the political class, with no one punished till the final week of the year. It is a conspiracy of silence where self-preservation is the need of the hour.
That this should happen on the watch of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Congress president Sonia Gandhi, whose working combination seems to have struck a chord with the public – if you drown out the negative chorus on Twitter – is, in my opinion, the biggest disappointment of the year for those praying for a new dawn.
Sadly, when it comes to tackling the cancer eating into the vitals of the nation, the couple seems hamstrung. Speeches pour forth, condemnations are issued, but there are no worthwhile explanations coming about why nothing was done when the exchequer was actually being bled.
It could well have been this waffling over corruption that sent the aam aadmi away from the Congress party by the droves in the Bihar assembly election and into the arms of Nitish Kumar, a man who doesn’t merely stop at issuing homilies about zero tolerance for corruption but who lives by his word, realizing that it is not enough to personally incorruptible but also provide a corruption-free administration in order to make a difference.
It is a lesson the Congress party will do well to internalize, for as Bihar is to India what India is to the world: a land of glorious past belied by a miserable present which holds it back from its rightful future.
Instead, the Congress party and its government are unable to break free of the shackles of the past. Under attack over corruption, it has preferred to divert attention to bogeys from yore that are best buried and forgotten. It could have taken its cue from the
Clearly, this is a winter of discontent whose icy fingers are seeping through the warm coverlet of positive sentiment. With critical state assembly elections due next year – including in bellwether states like Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and
What the Indian Mujahideen mail said
December 8th, 2010 No comments »This will haunt your nation of world’s ‘Greatest DemoNcracy’ until Muslims are paid back justly and fairly for the loss of their beloved Babri Masjid, the precious lives of their near and dear ones, their pride, dignity and self-respect.
Once a masjid is erected, it always remains a masjid and the ‘property’ of Allah until the last day. It cannot return to being the property of any person or community even those who may have paid for establishing it. Neither above it nor below it on any floor can be used for anything but as a masjid. Hence, all rulings that apply to a masjid will now apply to the exact same area directly below it on each of the lower floors (including the basement); and likewise on all floors above it because it is a masjid to the peaks of the heavens and likewise to the recesses of the earth below.
O Muslims! For the sake of Allah STOP trusting the Taghut Judiciary and the Taghut Parliament and mend ways to ‘please’ Allah alone. Technically speaking even the so- called ‘supreme court’ stands inefficient against legislations approved on the floor of the House. It needs no mention that time and again the Congress party with its hidden agenda has shown its true colors.
Be it the inaction over the planting of the idol in 1949 or the shilanyaas, the ground-breaking ceremony of 1989 and finally the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992. For all practical reasons the masjid site has since been transformed into a mandir, thanks to the Supreme Court order to maintain status-quo. The Allahabad high court’s verdict of ‘Aastha over Facts’ is exemplary of the bias judiciary although Ram is purely a mythical figure.
The Supreme Court, the high courts, the lower courts and all the commissions have utterly failed to play an impartial role regarding Muslim issues. Narendra Modi, who presided over the 2002 massacres of Muslims in Gujarat, is given a clean chit whereas the victims still run from pillar to post for justice. Even the ’92 Mumbai culprits roam freely and enjoy government security. All the anti-Muslim pre-planned riots, arson, rapes, losses of lives and properties are still awaiting justice. The list is endless!
O Muslims! We hereby declare that even if all the ulema, scholars and Muslim leaders collectively deviate from or refuse Allah and Prophet’s Verdict, their decision will be right beneath our feet. Ultimately, Allah is Most Supreme. Any argument against the Quran and Sahih Hadith is totally unacceptable to us. Neither the All India Muslim Personal Law Board nor the Babri Masjid Action Committee nor the Sunni Waqf Board nor any litigant has any right to alter or compromise on any of these aspects whatsoever regarding the Babri Masjid. All sorts of bartering and bargaining is totally unacceptable to Allah and thus to the Muslims.
Our Ulema ought to be those who fear Allah the most as they are the most knowledgeable but today it seems inversely true. They were to be more responsible and be at the forefront like the Huffaaz (Quran scholars) companions of Prophet, several of whom were martyred in the cause of Allah. They never sat back and were never content with giving lectures alone dying to join the good books of the Kuffar. It won’t be surprising if most scholars of our times fill the Hellfire. We urge those ulema to behave sensibly, change their attitude towards this Holy Cause, fear Allah alone, come forward, inspire and motivate the people and thus appease none but Allah alone.
We are fully aware of your preparations at the Babri Masjid site for the construction of a ‘grand temple’ over the corpses of our martyrs all over the country. The Indian Mujahideen warn these filthy Hindu zealots that even if a Grand Temple of Gold is built over the Babri Masjid we will destroy it at all costs. Remember! It was a Masjid, It is a Masjid and It will always remain a Masjid.
At this juncture Muslims are silent due to their state of affairs. We hereby invite all our Muslim brethren to never be weak-hearted over the designs of these idolators and urge them to strengthen their faith in Allah and unite for the cause of Islam. Surely, victory is awaiting us, InshaAllah. Our memories are still fresh and our hearts still bleeding over every Muslim brother and sister who was hacked to death after the demolition of Babri masjid. Indian history is decorated with countless state-sponsored terror and state-managed riots. Shaheed kii jo maut hai wo qaum ki hayaat hai. Indeed every martyr enlivens the ummah. By Allah!
We will not budge until every inch of the Masjid is regained and lives of our martyrs avenged. By the grace of Allah we will strike terror in the hearts and minds of these idol worshippers until the mountain of injustice is undone. InshaAllah, we will leave no stone unturned come what may till the anger of believer’s hearts is removed and a Magnificent Masjid is built at the same spot. We have now achieved skills to teach Newtons’ 3rd law in ‘their own’ terms. Our youth have all reasons to be proud and pompous to shoulder our responsibilities towards the Ummah, while our elderly can be content. Alhamdulillah! We seek their Duas and supplications for our cause.
If you continue with these ‘injustices’ then we promise that we will continue our war against you. In the name of Allah we are preparing for you since years and we will continue on this path. Hope you will appreciate and relish this deadly slap in your face for the reason that our brothers, sisters, elderly and kids have been subjugated to piles of humiliation at your hands. Remember they were also someone’s father and someone’s mother and also someone’s child.
Silence is not always golden, Mr Prime Minister
November 19th, 2010 2 comments »
One of the enduring memories of the Diwali weekend visit by the planet’s most powerful man – second most powerful, if you go by the recent Forbes ranking – to Mumbai was his interaction with college students at St Xaviers college, where he fielded diverse, and uncomfortable, questions. Questions ranging from what jihad meant to him to
The answers may not have satisfied everyone, but by opening himself to questions Obama won hearts and minds in an information-starved
Watching him open-mouthed, I realised that he opened up because of two possibilities. One, he had nothing to hide, or two, he did but was willing to brazen it out. The jury may be out on where Obama fits in, but my point is that it’s only those who have things to hide, who don’t have answers to uncomfortable questions, take refuge in silence and non-cummunication.
Unfortunately, a leader who communicates is not an image that sits well in
Media conferences happen may once in a while, but a Town Hall kind of meeting that Obama addressed, where the citizens’ concerns are directly addressed? If you rule out the ubiquitous election meetings the answer is, never.
Why is it that in this age of exploding communication, our leaders, regardless of age and ideology, shy away from communicating to the people who elect them? Why this unwillingness to be subject to some grilling by the people who voted you into office?
Could it be that our political leaders believe that once the votes are cast, the master-servant equation that powers the democratic machinery changes forever, till the next time the votes need to be canvassed?
It could be that most of our politicians belong to an era when communication only meant writing letters, making a speech and issuing press releases. The man who as finance minister ushered economic revolution in the country, has failed to realise that concomitant to his reforms is the explosion in media we see all around us, which have erased the distance between the ruler and the ruled, thanks to instant communication courtesy the internet.
To the undiscerning eye, the ensuing cacophony may seem like a media circus, but the true communicator – like Obama – would harness this favourably.
The counterpoint can be imagined: Ah, but the internet and such are a young man’s playthings, you don’t expect eminence grise to get online and chat, do you?
Which can be rebuffed with a quick: But what’s age got to do with anything, dude! The internet is just a medium. The print was yesterday’s, television is today’s and the internet is the medium of tomorrow. What matters is how effectively you use it.
Hugo Chavez is all of 56 years young, one doesn’t hear him cribbing about technology or new media as he engages with his constituents on Twitter. Or for that matter the venerable Fidel Castro, who engages a team to tweet for him. Only part of their reason could be to appear ‘cool’ and ‘with it’; mostly it is done out of their desire to get their message across.
Our own B S Yeddyurappa is no spring chicken, but thanks to twitter I knew this afternoon that the embattled Karnataka chief minister who is facing corruption charges has ‘ordered a judicial probe by a retired Supreme Court judge into all land deals, in and around
I wish I knew, similarly, as a citizen and not a journalist, what our prime minister thought of the various issues dogging his government, of which there are plenty.
I wish someone would tell him, and the rest of the political establishment, that communication is the hallmark of a true leader. All the legendary leaders were skillful communicators who used the tools of the day to get their point across – to the people, not to a privileged junta.
And going by the silence from 7,
Really, did things have to come to such a sorry pass where the prime minister, for the first time ever, has to explain his silence/inaction to the top court in the land? Even Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, who was directly accused of involvement in the Bofors scam but which was never proved, did not face such a situation. Nor did P V Narasimha Rao, believed by many (not me) to have presided over the most corrupt government in independent
Not even his political opponents suspect Prime Minister Manmohan Singh to be corrupt. Nor does anyone doubt that Dr Singh is a good man who has the nation’s wellbeing at heart. But often, a good man’s silence has the potential to cause more harm than a bad man’s deeds, and we have know this from the ancient legends of this land.
There are so many questions that Dr Singh can address, and here’s a sparse sample: Why, despite the widespread knowledge that Andimuthu Raja’s actions as telecom minister would cause a humongous loss to the exchequer, was he persisted with? Why were his dubious actions not annulled and his orders reversed? Why did it take so long for Raja to be sacked from the cabinet?
If what we learnt in our civic lessons years ago, that in a democracy the people are supreme, is true, why is the prime minister rushing to answer the Supreme Court and not the people whose mandate made his government? Couldn’t he have avoided the embarrassment by being more open and direct with the people in the first place?
And, there is a lesson in this sorry episode for all future, budding politicians. The point is, will they learn it?
