Category: Journalism

In a country with rigid dos and ‘don’ts and a military-oiled administrative machinery, one would think that the Presidentwould not have much to do. Unless, you go for the jugular of it all – striving to give a shape to humanity itself!

The proponent of a ‘Harmonious Society’, Hu Jintao had initially given an impression that unlike his predecessor and almost everyone around him, he was bit of liberal. But as the world learned soon, when it comes to the crux of Chinese governance, there is not much room for a ‘weak’ word like ‘liberal’. And that Hu is a pragmatist and hard-liner as far as any effort of political reform is concerned.

As a matter of trivia, GLOVADIs would be amused to learn that Hu’s son-in-law, Mao Daolin used to be CEO of Sina.com, a well-known internet portal of China, which has a history of blocking foreign websites!

Alarmingly for supporters of democracy, in late 2004, the Hong Kong magazine Open had quoted an alleged instruction by Hu to propaganda officials in September in which he was said to have suggested that when managing ideology, China should learn from Cuba and North Korea. Although North Korea had encountered “temporary economic problems”, its political policies were “consistently correct”! So there, did anyone talk of liberalism? Not Hu.

Ba Rong Ba Chi (Eight Honors (and) Eight Shames)

The Ba rong ba chi (“Eight Honors and Eight Shames”), officially the Core Value System or the Eight Honors and Disgraces, is a set of moral concepts developed by Hu Jintao for the citizens in socialist China. It is also known as “Eight Virtues and Shames”, or “Hu Jintao’s Eight-Step Programme”. Its formal name in China is “Socialist Concepts on Honours and Disgraces”

In the afternoon of March 4, 2006, Hu released this list calling it the “new moral yardstick to measure the work, conduct and attitude of Communist Party officials.” It is being promulgated as the moral code for all Chinese, especially Communist Party cadres.

1. Love the country; do it no harm
2. Serve the people; never betray them
3. Follow science; discard superstition
4. Be diligent; not indolent
5. Be united, help each other; make no gains at other’s expense
6. Be honest and trustworthy; do not sacrifice ethics for profit
7. Be disciplined and law-abiding; not chaotic and lawless
8. Live plainly, work hard; do not wallow in luxuries and pleasures

Hu might be talking about morality et al now for mainland China, but where does that leave the death of hundreds of Tibetans that was caused by his harsh crackdown on independence activists?

Don’t even try asking him about it.

What should the world expect from a leader who says ‘enough’ to the habit of Japan apologizing for its war crimes?

One can be forgiven for mistaking him for a mild and impeccably mannered Manager of a service or hospitality sector firm. But Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, the first Japanese leader born after World War II, is passionately ruthless about his agenda. To begin with, he is committed to tearing up the legacies of defeat.

The 52-year-old, dubbed “the prince” for his elite pedigree, became Japan’s youngest prime minister in September this year, fulfilling at an early age the ambitions of his family which has advanced conservative causes for generations.
“The time has come for our generation, who did not experience the war, to take the responsibility” to lead Japan, Abe said during the campaign.

Known to prefer Machintosh systems over Microsoft Windows, Abe is known to speak in quiet and complete sentences.
But, as the world is finding out slowly, not all of his quiet statements are about peace of mind. At a campaign rally, Abe had reportedly declared, “I want to write the constitution with my own hand.” The very obvious target of his belligerence was the pacifist constitution, which was imposed on a defeated Japan by the United States in 1947, seven years before he was born into a leading political family.

But what had caused the most panic across Japan’s neighbourhood was Abe’s very public mulling of a theoretical pre-emptive strike on North Korea! But it was precisely such talk on North Korea that Abe had first become a household name in Japan. The fodder for his approach was provided by North Korea itself, with its acceptance of having abducted Japanese people in the 1960s and 70s. In fact, but for his wife, a 44 year-old daughter of a businessman who is known for her love for Korean culture, one could have safely believed that Abe has an old score to settle with the Koreans.

Korea alone it might not have been, but history seems to have played a big role in shaping his passion.
Abe’s maternal grandfather Nobusuke Kishi served in the wartime cabinet and helped supervise the industrialisation of Manchukuo, the puppet state Japan set up in northeastern China. After the war, Kishi was jailed by US forces as a top war criminal although he was not tried. Kishi later became prime minister, fighting leftists to build the new alliance with Washington.

Not surprisingly, Abe has always  backed his predecessor Junichiro Koizumi’s pilgrimages to the Yasukuni shrine, which honours war dead and war criminals. Koizumi’s visits have infuriated neighbouring countries haunted by Japan’s aggression.

What might be discomforting for the world, however, is that Abe’s views are a bit too further to the right than those of Koizumi. He has rejected the legitimacy of post-war trials of war criminals and hinted he feels Japan has apologised enough for its war past.

Desire and decisiveness both run in his family. His father was Shintaro Abe, a foreign minister. Shintaro wanted to be a prime minister, but could not because of, firstly a scandal and then cancer, to which he later succumbed. But within a decade of taking over his father’s parliament seat Abe has fulfilled his family’s desire.

Good ol’ Pluto is no longer a planet. It has been demoted to the status of being a ‘dwarf planet’. As expected, the decision is not without its critics.

A vote at the International Astronomical Union’s (IAU) 10-day General Assembly in Prague this summer has demoted Pluto to the status of a dwarf planet. The IAU has been the official naming body for astronomy since 1919.

Raising consternation amongst the astronomers community is the fact that only 424 astronomers who remained in Prague for the last day of the meeting took part in the voting – thereby implying that the decision is far from universal.
An initial proposal by the IAU to add three new planets to the Solar System – the asteroid Ceres, Pluto’s moon Charon and the distant world known as 2003 UB313 – met with considerable opposition at the meeting. Days of heated debate followed during which four separate proposals were tabled.

Eventually, the scientists adopted historic guidelines that saw Pluto getting relegated to a secondary category of “dwarf planets”.

It would only be appropriate  to remind ourselves here that Pluto’s official status as a planet has been a constant subject of controversy, fueled by the past lack of a clear definition of planet, since at least as early as 1992, when the first Kuiper Belt Object, (15760) 1992 QB1, was discovered.

With betterment of telescope technology, further discoveries of trans-Neptunian objects, some of comparable size to that of Pluto, were made by scientists in US and Europe. In 2006 the matter came to a head with the need to categorize and name the recently-discovered trans-Neptunian object Eris, which, being larger than Pluto, was thought to be at least equally deserving of the status of ‘planet’.

“To most people the word “planet” is more cultural than scientific. It is part of the mental landscape that we use to organize our ideas of the universe around us. The best analogy I can come up with is with the word “continent.” The word sound like it should have some scientific definition, but clearly there is no way to construct a definition that somehow gets the 7 things we call continents to be singled out. Why is Europe called a separate continent? Only because of culture. You will never hear geologists engaged in a debate about the meaning of the word “continent” though.

Astronomers might be wise to learn from the geologists. Let culture define “planet” and let astronomers get back to the more important business of actually doing science.“

Michael E. Brown (Discoverer of dwarf planet Eris)

In the wake of increasing debates within the IAU, Julio Fernández and Gonzalo Tancredi of Uruguay proposed of a redefining of the term ‘planet’; so that other objects beyond the traditional nine planets could also be included in the planetary family.

Eventually, on August 24, 2006 in Prague, Czech Republic, the vote removed Pluto’s status as a planet and reclassified it as a dwarf planet.

However, almost immediately after and since  the adoption of the new definition, there has been criticism of both the substance and the process of arriving at the decision.

Within five days of the new IAU Planet Definition over 300 scientists signed a petition that opposed the new definition. Interestingly, the petition too has been criticized; because unlike the wide national identities of the voters at the IAU assembly,  nearly all of its signatories are Americans. The petitioners also failed to propose an alternative definition, so their signatures are no indication that they are all of similar views.

Among the general public, reception is mixed amidst widespread media coverage. Some have accepted the reclassification, while some are seeking to overturn the decision, with online petitions urging the IAU to consider reinstatement.

Within five days of the new IAU Planet Definition, over 300 scientists signed a petition that opposed the new definition. The full text of the petition says: “We, as planetary scientists and astronomers, do not agree with the IAU’s definition of a planet, nor will we use it. A better definition is needed.”

The decision has its cultural and societal implications too. It will affect the astronomical artifacts and toys industry. Educational books need to be revised. Something that prompted the editors of the 2007 edition of the World Book Encyclopedia to hold off printing until a final result had been reached.

Portuguese traveler Barbosa, who visited Gujarat in A.D. 1511 and 1514, had described Ahmedabad as “very rich and well embellished with good streets and squares supplied with houses of stone and cement.” In Sir Thomas Roe’s time, A.D. 1615, it was said to be “a goodly city as large as London”.

How things have changed!

Or have they? According to a recent report, Ahmedabad’s population is slated to touch the 1 Crore mark in 2030! That would, irrespective of the difference between the two populations of the time, still make Ahmedabad  ‘as large as London’.

But that would be missing tree for wood. For, the embellishment of the description of Ahmedabad was provided not as much by the word ‘large’, as it was by the entirety of the  phrase ‘goodly city’ viz. good, big and handsome.
So, what is a ‘goodly city’ in its entirety?

Depends on where one comes from! But a part of it is carried in Babosa’s description viz. “well embellished with good streets and squares”. While it is, as already mentioned, only a part of the big picture, it speaks of the nature of the populace. It talks of a society that is not only organized but also encourages room for togetherness via public squares. It talks of a society that is not only progressing with the times but also preserving the early-life goodness like community huddle, for sharing those anecdotes that make life such a good story.

Ahmedabad today has innumerable malls, multiplexes, high-rises and an increasing number of flyovers. But name one great public square  a la Trafalgar Square of London  that the modern day town planners have gifted the City with. In fact, today’s children might well say that the only squares they see are the various cross-roads; and those too are basically reserved for cows!

We have various chic cafes, but do not have the coffee-house culture. We have close to 40 movie halls, including about a dozen multiplexes, but do not have a cinema culture. Our theatre is basically imported from Mumbai. We have timers on crossroads, but we think that the traffic should zoom when there are 6 seconds to go! We have some of India’s finest educational and research institutes, but do not have healthy public conversation on anything. We have some of biggest home-grown business houses, but do not have professionalism at most levels. We have continental restaurants, but we think that the place is meant to shout trans-continent while having our mouth full. We have the latest mobile phones, but we believe that they work the best during a movie or inside an ICU.

It is tiring for me and must be boring for you to read the aforementioned. Moreover, one may argue that most of the aforementioned is applicable to most Indian Cities.

Maybe; but how does your neighbour’s diarrhea cure your tummy ache?

This is not a malicious diatribe against the City. All of the aforementioned is stated merely to illustrate the various factors that are contributing to our size but not to our character. Ahmedabad is today a ‘goodly city as large as most European cities’, but it does not have good enough reasons to attract travelers anymore.

Don’t worry about some of the new-age ‘happening cities’ of India. Let them fool themselves with hyperboles. The truth of the matter is that no Indian city is good enough. The fight for prestige amongst Indian cities is basically about being crowned the one-eyed amongst blind!

We have the heterogeneity and we definitely have the means. Now if we get it right, we might start moving towards becoming a really “goodly City”. But for that to happen, we will have to refrain from scoring inconsequential brownie points over the nearest rival and set the benchmark right. 1615 A.D.  should be a good one to begin with.

You are encouraged to share your views on the city and its people.

Come, let’s spend some time together.

Just not Cricket is a phrase that speaks for life much beyond the boundary ropes of a Cricket ground. It speaks for anything that is not fair, anywhere.

Alas, one need not have gone too far to understand the real meaning of the expression. The misfortune was right there in front of our eyes, on four gloriously flood-lit evenings at the Sardar Patel Motera Stadium, India’s second biggest stadium by capacity, the Motera stadium – which, curiously, now sports Gandhinagar as its guardian city – could have been mistaken for a place playing host to Vastrapur XI vs Shahibaug XI match on four of the five days when the big-ticket ICC Champions Trophy was underway.

Admittedly, even the final was not a packed stadium, at what is routinely called the home of Indian Cricket. (Unlike Mumbai, Lords is called the home of Cricket and not the home of British Cricket.) But, how does someone else’s poor batting helping your problem of bowling no-balls?

It is no one’s case that watching Zimbabwe battle it out with either Sri Lanka or West Indies is not the most enthralling of all prospects. But do Amdavadis let go a Shah Rukh or Hrithik film just because the supporting cast is not good? And even if that were the case, the truth coming across would still be that the passion is more for the players than the script. There’s nothing wrong in it per se; but it can never be the absolute thing. Shah Rukh or Hrithik are just as much a product of the craft of Cinema as  Sachin or Dhoni are that of the sport of Cricket. People have never been, are not and can never be bigger than the idea of life itself, right?

Yes, superstars are needed across the globe to make people throng stadiums. But why should the idea of superstars be restricted to a star player of our own nation? Don’t support them when they are taking the game away from us but why not support geniuses like Lara or Muralidharan in a neutral match?

The fact of the matter is that the majority of the city – and indeed the nation – does not really have the passion for the game. We merely seek to extract a good time at the expense of the finer details of the game itself. The difference is that between having a beer while being at a pajama party and sipping wine at an intellectually, emotionally and aesthetically fulfilling dinner.

Indeed it was the holiday season and a lot of people, including, significantly, the affluent families, were probably out of town. Holiday season brings along a host of other priorities too. But what then explains the choc-o-block restaurants, multiplexes and all places public in the city?

Also, while the apathy for qualifying matches (involving Zimbabwe) is understandable, what would explain the fact that even the India – West Indies encounter was not a full house? It probably was the biggest crowd of the entire tournament, but it was not a full house. Try to come up with a reason for a Lara Vs Sachin encounter failing to completely fill up a stadium in India. Your mind might come up with all the aforementioned reasons like it being a festive season, but chances are that your heart would remain unconvinced.

And what about the Lara vs Flintoff or Jayasurya vs Pollock encounters? When next would there be an opportunity to see Pietersen score an unbeaten 80 on Amdavadi soil to take England past a resurgent West Indies?

Obviously, watching a match on television – with its never-ending replays from all possible angles – is becoming quite a joyous experience in its own. The comfort of home and joy of listening to former greats while watching the match are definite pluses. But can that replace the sheer excitement of sitting under flood lights with 50,000 other cricket lovers? What about the sound of bat hitting the ball, which somehow always manages to get heard amidst the din? What about the child-like enthusiasm that every single participant of the numerous ‘mexican waves’ experiences? What about having all the eleven fielders in our view for every single ball of the match? What about having the once-in-a-lifetime joy of catching a Sachin or Lara six in the stands? What about feeling the adrenalin rush at the entry of a superstar on to the pitch to bat? What about hundreds of wacky t-shirts and head-gears worn by the fans? And hey, what about the free fashion statements by the better half of the crowd? The list can go on and on. And yet, it can be summed up with the assertion that watching a match live is like meeting your dear ones in person and watching it on TV is like talking to them on phone.

Watching a game live gives us a completely new perspective about field positions, the merits or otherwise of going over the top of fielders during various match situations, the effort put by the fielders to cover field positions like third man and the real pace and bounce of a quick bowler. Watching Jerome Taylor hit Sachin on the chest gives us the most accurate perspective on the options available for batsmen; just as vast open tracts on either side of the pitch (visible to us every single moment) tells us about the limitations within which bowlers have to operate.

Watching a game live at the stadium is like a hands-on learning that no ‘instruction manual’ like television can replicate. We have giant screens at the stadiums now; but can we have the stadiums in our home?

But the root of our apathy lies in our knowledge about the game itself. About the game outside the halo of superstardom i.e. We care more for the entertainment friendly and very little for the studious or the simpletons.

The idea behind introducing the two crowning jewels of Ahmedabad is multi-faceted. Firstly, we believe that very few in the city – including even the true lovers of the game – are aware of the enormity of the feats of both Jasu and Mukund. And if we, through this magazine, can give even a token of tribute to their efforts on the field, it would only be richly deserved by the two.

We also wished to bring into focus the fact that the game lives – and lives handsomely – outside the ‘super-stardom ring’ too. Players who are not or could not become superstars need not necessarily be lesser players. But to understand and appreciate that, one has to understand the nuances of the game. We might cry hoarse about lack of time for our lack of effort, but don’t we all give our all to things that we like? Don’t stock-brockers think, sleep and talk the share market? Do they not understand the value of steady scrips amidst the glitter of the superstar billings? Those who do not, are not the ones who understand the business of shares. Ditto for followers of the game of Cricket.

The larger issue, however, is the lack of environment for appreciation of pure forms of any facet of life. Just as a game involving small totals and no sixes calls for refined spectators, the so-called art cinema, classical music and belief in a long haul over short cuts are all features that make – as they say – men stand out from boys. To be able to do that, you have to be in love with a thing and not merely love it. Talk to a young lady to get the meaning of the quandary.
So, is Ahmedabad in love with the game of Cricket or does it merely love the star Cricketers?

The answer, unfortunately, would have to be the latter reality.

But what should make us all hopeful is the incredible improvement in the overall sports scenario of the city. Apart from very good performances by players like Sidharth Trivedi in Cricket, our junior tennis players – like Vaidik Munshaw – are making a mark at the Asian level. And he is not alone. Tennis players are being prepared by the city in an  almost assembly-line fashion. There are good swimmers, skaters and basketball players representing the city with distinction – thereby slowly but steadily improving the city’s  ‘instinct for sports’.

Yes, it would take many years for it to become an all-pervasive reality. But when it finally happens, we would be able to cheer Prosper Utseya’s men too. Now THAT would be cricket!