The importance of having multiple interests

Every man (and woman) should have interests in a multitude of areas. I am interested in politics, both international and domestic, consumer technology, sports such as tennis, cricket and the various events at Olympics, history, geography and travel.

Many people I know are interested in only a few things that are of immediate concern to them. When I was a student, many of my peers focused so much on their books that they had neither the time nor the inclination to read the newspaper. And then the same people ran from pillar to post asking others how to prepare for group discussions and interviews when the placement season arrived. Even today I know a lot of people who are one – dimensional when it comes to interests. Apart from cricket that most in India follow, many people would struggle to strike a conversation with anyone beyond one or two topics. So if you are into stocks and follow cricket and happen to meet someone who works in Technology and doesn’t like cricket, the conversation gets muted after just a few minutes. Weather in India is hardly the ice-breaker it is in United Kingdom.

Thankfully, my varied interests help me fuel my passion for reading and writing. It helps me strike and maintain conversations. If you are interested in learning about different things, it not just makes you more informed but also improves your social stock. If your wife isn’t your best friend or doesn’t share the same interests, you can always avoid boredom or loneliness by immersing yourselves in your long list of interests and passions.

That’s what I do.

Lee-Hesh Controversy: What Ails Indian Tennis?

London Olympics is barely a few months away and instead of focusing its efforts on trying to win a gold medal, Indian Tennis is embroiled in a new controversy. Leander Paes (39), the most successful Indian tennis player ever and the top ranked doubles player for India wants to partner either Mahesh Bhupathi (38), another legend and power center of tennis in the country or Rohan Bopanna (32). The problem stems from the fact that both Bhupathi and Bopanna want to partner each other and not Paes. Paes does not want to partner younger players like Yuki Bhambri (19) or Vishnu Vardhan (24).

The All India Tennis Association (AITA) is also to blame. It can send two teams to Olympics and that will surely not decrease our chances of getting a medal. But it has ruled out the option and insists on sending one team with Paes as one of the players. Paes has threatened to pull out from Olympics if Bhupathi or Bopanna are not made to partner him.

The two team option would be the best with AITA sending a young player with Paes despite his protests. If that doesn’t work out, Paes should be allowed to pull out and Bhupathi-Bopanna should go in the interest of Indian tennis. But AITA, being the wise sports body it is, is having none of that.

What is even more regrettable is that online forums are filled with user comments siding with either Leander Paes or Mahesh Bhupathi and calling each other names. I believe Leander and Mahesh has done a great service to Indian tennis and nobody who doesn’t know the truth should question the commitment and nationalism of these players and call them selfish. The best we can do is speculate about the motivations and what could have gone wrong and form our own opinions. These opinions may be far from truth until unless the true story comes out.

The first question that then beckons is why nobody wants to partner Leander Paes. These pointers might help a reader form an idea. It, however, needs to be mentioned here that these are mostly rumors and grapevine and what exactly happened may never be fully known.

• Grapevine has it that Paes contrived to keep Bhupathi out of the squad for the Davis Cup tie against Uzbekistan and succeeded.
• It is rumoured that Paes tried to convince Bopanna to partner him even when he was playing actively with Bhupathi in 2011. Bhupathi has termed it an act of back-stabbing. Paes’ father has said that Leander broke up his partnership with Bhupathi because he wanted a younger player with fresh legs.
• Another rumour is that Paes gave a tongue-lashing to Bopanna after they lost the doubles game in Uzbekistan and this didn’t go down well with Rohan.
• It is alleged that as Davis Cup captain, Leander Paes ruled with an iron fist and AITA gave him a free hand to decide who will play what game. In 2008, four players – Prakash Amritraj, Bopanna, Bhupathi and Karan Rastogi revolted against Paes’ captaincy and wrote to the AITA that they will not play Davis Cup ties if Paes was the captain. Prakash Amritraj had this to say about Leander’s captaincy – “This man has taken the joy away from playing the Davis Cup,”
• Firstpost.com in an article had this to say about Leander – If you speak to officials or former tennis players, they will tell you in no uncertain terms that Leander Paes is selfish. They will tell you that with Paes — the arguments begin with him and end with him; no one else has a chance to participate.

In the last six months and since breaking up with Bhupathi in 2011, Leander has not played with an Indian partner on the tennis circuit. Since the start of 2012, Bhupathi and Bopanna have played together with an eye on the Olympics. Therefore, the second question is why AITA is so adamantly supporting Paes’ demand to be paired up with Bhupathi or Bopanna.

The answer is not clear though there are rumours that AITA doesn’t like Bhupathi much because his company, GloboSports, organized a few ATP and WTA events in India and managed to get players like Martina Navratilova, Serena Williams, Martina Hingis and Mary Pierce without AITA playing any significant role in those tournaments.

In light of these rumours, facts and arguments, following questions remain open for Indian tennis fans to ponder over and decide what is it that ails Indian tennis?

• Doubles is all about coordination and camaraderie. Why doesn’t a sports body like AITA get it?
• Bopanna gave up a successful partnership with Pakistani player Aisam-ul-Haq Qureshi to partner Mahesh and prepare for Olympics. Is AITA justified in trying to thwart his Olympic dreams?
• If India can send two teams based on individual (Paes is ranked 7th individual doubles ranking) and team rankings (Bhupathi-Bopanna are ranked 7th as a team), why is AITA insisting on just one? Wouldn’t the probability of winning a medal increase with more teams representing India?
• If Leander wanted a younger player with fresh legs, what is stopping him to partner Yuki or Vishnu?
• If Leander was so concerned about his chances in Olympics, why is not playing with an Indian player on the ATP circuit?
• Just because he is the highest ranked Indian, does Leander have a right to jeopardize someone else’s dreams by demanding that they break-up with their playing partner? Is he not responsible for striking a partnership himself with players who are willing to play alongside him?
• Are we and the AITA fair in expecting Bhupathi and Bopanna to be available to partner Paes whenever he wants it while Leander is free to dump them when it serves his interest?
• On 7th June 2012, Mahesh Bhupathi and Sania Mirza won the French Open mixed doubles. But AITA wants Sania to partner Leander at Olympics. Why?

Both Leander Paes and Mahesh Bhupathi are legends as far as Indian tennis go. Get angry, ridicule their arguments and form your opinions if you may but don’t get abusive towards the men who have given their lives to the sports. Whatever they do now and in future, they deserve respect for the laurels they have brought to India and Indian tennis in the past.

References:

http://www.dnaindia.com/sport/report_what-makes-leander-paes-such-an-outcast_1703737 

http://www.firstpost.com/sports/olympics-2012-why-nobody-wants-to-play-with-leander-paes-345305.html 

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-06-19/london-olympics/32316617_1_leander-paes-mahesh-bhupathi-rohan-bopanna

http://www.rediff.com/sports/2008/feb/24davis.htm

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/aita-wants-to-pair-sania-leander-for-olympics/266208-5-22.html

 

First published on Reader’s Quotient on June 21, 2012

http://readersquotient.com/columns/lee-hesh-controversy-what-ails-indian-tennis

Why Dev D is a classic

A lot of my female friends who have watched Dev D, a modern take on Devdas conceptualized by actor Abhay Deol and directed by Anurag Kashyap, have dismissed the film and the concept. The reasons I hear are one of these:

• There is nothing new about the story except an overdose of sex
• It’s all about sex and drugs

However, it is this alleged ‘overdose’ of sex which indirectly hints at the message that today’s younger audiences should have grasped. But first, let me honestly accept that some of the scenes are indeed quite shocking. Like the one where Paro, played by newcomer Mahie Gill, carries a mattress to the fields on a bicycle in order to be able to make out with her lover Dev. Or the dialogues that Chanda, the MMS scandal victim played by Koel, speaks to her on-screen father.

Let me make it clear here that while these scenes are shocking, it doesn’t mean that they don’t happen in real life. Go to villages and you would find that couples having sex in a field is nothing out of the world. Chanda uses the same slangs and vocabulary that today’s college going crowd uses daily.

So where is the message I am talking about? The message lies in the treatment Paro receives at the hands of Dev. And it’s not a single message, rather there are four points that the director leaves its audiences to ponder with.

The first point is the obsession with sex that today’s college going youth has. In the movie, it is not difficult to assume that Dev is addicted to porn. Look at his expressions when he is downloading Paro’s topless picture on his laptop and you would know what he has been learning in London. The second example of this is when Dev tells a married Paro that he wants to love her and in the very next scene talks about ‘making love’ as if you cannot love a person without ‘making’ love.

The second point about our society reveals itself in the way a village guy who claims to love Paro talks about her sexual behavior. Not only he says this to Dev, he brags about it to others as well. I was surprised how true this is to real life. During my intermediate and engineering days, we often heard such stories about girls who were more outgoing that the average. And the rumour-mongers often went to great lengths to claim that their stories were nothing but the truth. The fact, as we know now, is that 9 out of 10 such stories were totally fabricated. How easy it is for we guys to malign a girl’s character, isn’t it?

In the movie, Dev believes the rumours he hears about Paro. The reason is simple. Because Paro is ready to do it with Dev, her beloved, she must be doing it with other guys as well. And he calls her a slut. Isn’t it amazing how quickly we brand women who are not meek and have a mind of her own as ‘sluts’? This is the third point that Anurag Kashyap makes.

Dev refuses to marry Paro, breaks her heart and his own in the process. And after he goes on a path of self-destruction, he finally meets Chanda and finds love. And it is here where the fourth and probably the most disguised point about the movie comes to light. Not many people have understood that Dev D is a slap on the face of a male-dominated society that is so obsessed with a women’s virginity. Dev has no reason to doubt Paro’s virginity but does so because he himself is no saint and finally accepts as his own a woman who has taken to prostitution. Can it get any more hard-hitting than this?

Dev D is a tight slap across the male community who equates love with sex and brands women as sluts.

Doctor Foot In Mouth

Never before in the history of independent India, we have had a minister who is known more for controversies and foolishness than his policies. I am talking about about health minister Anbumani Ramadoss. Here are some examples:

After his support for caste-based quotas in medical colleges, he proposed one-year compulsory rural posting for government doctors. The logic: they pay dismally low fees for their education. While the minister’s idea for improving the quality of medical services in rural India certainly seems noble, he has conveniently disregarded the infrastructure that is needed to provide good medical service to villages. Sending doctors to far flung villages will not have any impact, if dispensaries and hospitals located in these parts of the country continue to face shortage of good quality equipment and medicines and other supplies. This move will only end up depressing the new breed of medical practitioners. He must also ensure that if compulsory rural posting is implemented, it is government’s responsibility to ensure that the doctors are provided good living quarters and safety is ensured.. Houses with thatched leaking roofs are hardly an incentive to someone who has toiled hard to get this education. The service motive has to be there in a medical student ideally but let’s get real here.

Indeed, this was visible when many junior lady doctors asked Ramadoss to marry them and accompany them to villages. “Be our husband and come with us to the villages to protect us. If he (Ramadoss) is so keen on sending us to the villages then he should also be there to support us,” a student said.

Hon’ble minister created another stir by claiming that Delhi media hauls him up for any issue concerning AIIMS because he belongs to the Most Backward Caste (MBC). Ramadoss was clearly referring to the flak he faced after introducing the bill on the retirement age of AIIMS head, aimed at removing Dr. P Venugopal as the director. This behaviour and mindset highlights an important aspect that is often ignored when we discuss reservations. Ramadoss, a man belonging to the MBC category has reached great heights and is now a minister in the Union government. Still, whenever someone speaks against him, he cries foul and considers it a casteist attack. Clearly, reservations and all the incentives has not changed the caste-based mentality. Even for a highly educated person like Ramadoss, caste comes before logical reasoning. If this is the state of affairs, how can we say that continuing caste-based reservations will make everyone equal? How can everyone be equal if caste is linked to each action and decision?

Some of the other remarks which were equally crazy range from criticizing the BPO lifestyle for all ills of the modern day society to asking every member of the family before lighting up a cigarette.

And the latest in a never-ending saga of PR disasters is a remark that a doctor from Bihar was the sole cause for Britain de-recognizing MBBS degrees. After several protests and customary burning of effigies, Ramadoss defended himself by saying “I am also a doctor. I will be the last person to denigrate or defame any doctor from any state. It is a noble profession and I respect everyone coming from any state – be it Bihar or Uttar Pradesh. I have always said that Indian doctors are the best in the world. I have lot of respect for doctors from Bihar.” As is the norm Dr. Ramadoss later blamed media for misquoting him and projecting as if he had denigrated the image of the doctors from Bihar.

This story will not end here. The coalition dharma of the UPA government will ensure that Ramadoss continues in office. And knowing him, the entertainment would just keep coming.

Boring Actually

Now, I am not the one to write movie reviews on this site but just couldn’t help it this time. Watched Salaam-E-Ishq and was so moved that had to do this.

It is said that this movie is based on a hollywood flick, that is, Richard Curtis’s Love Actually. Its punchline goes “Six Couples, twelve different lives, one common problem – Love”. The problem with this Nikhil Advani directed movie is exactly this. It is not possible to do justice to six stories in three hours when you have lots of songs. But Mr. Advani will have none of this. So, he has made a movie that is three and a half hours long. But even then he fails to do justice to even one of the stories.

Let’s get to the couples now. Isha Koppikar and Sohail Khan play a newly wed ‘always in the mood’ haryanavi couple and Sohail’s body language seems more suited to a C-grade sex flick. Though it makes people laugh, it is not enough to make you remain seated for a long time. Love. No way. Lust Actually!!! John Abraham and Vidya Balan play their parts well and John shines as a loving husband whose wife has an accident and loses her memory as well as her make-up.

One person who would be angry with how his character has shaped up is Salman Khan. The audience never gets to understand whether he is a manager, waiter, or a thug who suddenly appears to help Priyanka Chopra realize her dream of acting in a Karan Johar film. Priyanka Chopra however gets to showcase her flair for comedy. In fact, Johar’s name is mentioned at least 10 times in those torturous three hours and in the end, Priyanka darling chooses Salman over her starry dreams. Love Actually, huh!!!

Govinda gets a lot of footage and does his role well, of a simple cabbie who dreams of settling down with a ‘videshi’ babe. The babe provides for some funny moments with her pronunciation of Hindi but that is all there is to it. Anil Kapoor plays a 40 year old father of two who is tired of his routine life and feels attracted to a pretty young girl, Anjali (played by Anjana Sukhani) who teaches bollywood dance. Wife Juhi chawla is obviously not amused with her hubby’s naughty-at-forty ways and that is all she is there for. Surprisingly, newcomer Anjana has more lines than Juhi. The background tune ‘What’s on your mind’ whenever Anil seems awestruck by Anjana’s beauty is at least music to the ears. Watching a clean-shaven Anil Kapoor in camouflage jackets and cargo pants breakdancing in a club is unfortunately not pleasing to the eyes.

 

Ayesha Takia, who plays Jia, has not much to do. The surprise package is Akshaye Khanna, who as a commitment-phobic young man does everything to effect a break up with Takia once his friend describes our hero as ‘Jia ka Piya’. It does make us laugh and we thank God for such sequences without which there is nothing to feel good about.

Salaam-E-Ishq is all mediocrity, nothing more. It could have been better with such a talented star cast but then again, it’s the screenplay and the direction or the lack of it that has buries this movie. Ask the public who has endured it. Even a one star rating would be generosity.

Indian Idiots

I am fed up and I am sure others, who appreciate good music, are tired too. The practice of letting viewers vote out any talent-hunt contestant has crossed all levels of stupidity. People who do not have any understanding of music get to vote not only once but as many times as they wish to make their favourite contestant win. While nothing seems wrong in the concept of viewers’ choice, the execution is faulty as the people’s vote almost always goes opposite to the views of the learned panel of judges, who understand music more than the conscience-less bunch of mobile-wielding idiots.

A few hours back, when 18 year-old Antara Mitra was voted out of Indian Idol 2, my worst fears came true: that the voting audience is not interested in talent but only in seeing their favourite faces win, even if it means throwing a better voice out. Antara’s case is not the first instance. Sometime back, in Fame Gurukul, Qazi and Ruprekha benefited from viewers’ benevolence by prevailing over much more talented and versatile performers like Rex D’Souza and Arpita Mukherjee.

Seeing public’s insensitivity towards ‘sur and taal‘, one wonders why the contestants are made to sing. The idiots that they are, the voting audience would be happier to see them walk the ramp like international models than hear their voice. After all, they have to vote only on the face-value.