Gauri Lankesh’s abject defence of Bangalore’s liberalism requires analysis (“How did Bengaluru become unsafe for women – and what can we do to reclaim our streets?”). Its liberalism and cosmopolitanism lay in how women wore short dresses in Brigade Road and consumed alcohol in the heyday of the seventies and the eighties. Of course there were Romeos and molesters but comparatively less than in the second decade of the twenty first century.
Lankesh does not offer us any statistics to support this claim, just her own personal experiences which can be easily contradicted by several women including myself who have lived in Bangalore for a major part of our lives. Her contention on what could have gone wrong rests on neo-liberalism anti-ethical to Bangalorean liberalism – outsiders who are new to Bangalore’s “gender friendly liberalism”, the male gaze which is an incorrect form of liberalism and that Bangalore is becoming like the rest of the country. Her status as an elite native can be seen in her assertion of linguistic chauvinism being absent in Bengaluru and the fact that she did not mention the riots after Rajkumar’s death and the Gokak agitation in the 1980s. – Geetanjali A Srikantan
Let us not forget how the depiction of women in Bollywood perpetuates the commodification of women. I am still shocked by the lyrics of the immensely popular “Fevicol Se” song. Most Bollywood heroines have performed in these item numbers, which makes them complicit in their own objectification. – Arnab Basak
This move appears to be an ill-thought one where the burden of responsibility of protection seems to shift from the CISF to the women commuters (“Women commuters can carry knives on Delhi Metro trains for ‘self-protection’”).
What happens if a potential attacker is able to wrestle a knife from the woman who’s being attacked? Why not deploy beat marshals on the trains, or equip each coach with adequate surveillance and alarm-triggering mechanisms to deter potential mischief makers? Moreover, why not enforce the law by meting out harsher punishments? – Kunal Roy
This book is an eye-opener for Indians who may not be aware of the existence of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (“Why India cannot win wars against its neighbours (and why that doesn’t even matter”). And the book offers much pain for those wish to see India’s conflicts with its neighbours end in victory for her.
According to me, India cannot be a pivot nation, because it is a destination of power in itself. Geopolitical ambitions find their destination here. India has significant little to gain from exerting her influence over the Central Asian wastelands; her energy would be better spent on defending plains and the plateaus of India proper. And, as far as defence is concerned, the Indian Armed Forces have done a decent job. Pakistan continues to attack, but they are further from a victory, military or otherwise, than they ever were.
As for China and the CPEC, the strategic value of these will come into question over time. Shipping rates are the lowest they have ever been. Why spend billions on developing road infrastructure over wastelands and mountains when sea trade is more efficient? Of what use is the CPEC when, despite its existence, Pakistan is not able to trade with its most obvious destination market, India? It would be unwise of India to offer it this courtesy when the bloodletting tactics of Pakistan continue unabated.
Plus it does not seem China herself has much to gain from developing these corridors as the Asian Giant is already destination market – there is not one country where China is not a key supplier. – Krishnan
This was a nice article, but I think the author needs to carry out more research in this field. What halts India’s rise to becoming a superpower are politics played by NATO nations and their allies.
The writer says: “Let alone China, India cannot even win a war against Pakistan. And this has nothing to do with the possession of nuclear weapons – the roles of nuclear and conventional weapons are separate in the war planning of India, China and Pakistan.”
This is an exaggeration. Despite optimal use of military force, which the author stresses on, Pakistan was not able to hold off Kargil, let alone win the war.
It’s not Pakistan or NATO’s optimisation that saves them from Russia or India, it’s the values of the latter two. Else a country with NSAs like Ajit Doval can realise nightmares even to China! – Laksha Tyagi
Thanks for this critical analysis, which is so well written. If India wants to project herself as a world power, then it will have to go along with Bangladesh and Pakistan. A grand alliance of common interest between these three countries, and Afghanistan, will make the subcontinent a huge superpower economically as well militarily.
The only hurdles in this path are Indo-Pak armed forces. – Abrar Ahmad
This is with reference to “A visit to Pakistan’s Eimanabad, where Guru Nanak once stayed, throws new light on Babur’s legacy.”
In the article, Haroon Khalid says:
“Nanak refused to bless the Mughal king, questioning his audacity to seek his blessings after conquering the land where he lived. However,
even without the guru’s blessings, Babur succeeded in his conquests and in spreading the Mughal Empire.”
However, it is written and believed by many scholars that Babur, on learning that a very holy man was in prison, Babur visited Guru Nanak, granted him liberty and invited him to his tent for further discussions.
During these discussions, Guru Nanak asked Babur to be just with all and stop terrorising the innocent. – Shankar Das
Caste affiliations may be one of the factors that influence people to vote for a particular party or a candidate, but not at the cost of performance and administrative experience (“Jayalalithaa’s death gives Tamil Nadu a chance to rescue itself from politics of hate and caste”). Instead of advocating people of other fraternities on their political beliefs and choices, the immediate challenge facing the author’s party and other smaller parties is to formulate strategies and build a positive reputation so that people also have them in their mind while making a decision. But for narrow political gains, such parties have built an undesirable reputation and pass the buck for their political being on others. – Karthik G
A reservation for Dalits and religious minorities for posts of chief minister, state ministers, general secretary and the like should be demanded.
However, as you might have noticed, Dalits and religious minorities in top posts of the judiciary and bureaucracy are still seeking the advice of Brahmins only. This attitude needs to be changed. They should be firm about their own decisions. What suggestions does the author have for this? – Balakumar MS
The reviewer rightly explains the ideology of the Dangal – a mix of competitive sports and hegemonic nationalism (“Three things Dangal’s mind-boggling success taught us”). We know that the cult of militant nationalism often reproduces itself through hyper-competitive sports carnivals. And in this alliance of sports and nationalism lies everything that fulfils the need for mass entertainment and thrill. At a time when we see the assertion hyper-masculine nationalism, a film like this acquires a special meaning – it seems to be in tune with the mood of the times.
Yes, it is a well-crafted film. However, its ideological messages are immensely problematic. For instance, its discourse of feminism is self-defeating because it assumes that successful women have to be like men – tough, competitive, divorced from the softer dimensions of life; and they have to defeat men at their own game. The doctrine of aggression is not challenged; it is just in an apparently feminist package. – Avijit Pathak
I am a regular visitor to your site, thanks to your excellent coverage, incisive analysis, lucid writing, and most importantly, balanced approach. Therefore, this story came as an unpleasant surprise to me.
Starting with Lagaan, Aamir Khan has made a string of films that are not only entertaining and aesthetically pleasing, but also educative, and inspiring, such as Taare Zameen Par and Three Idiots.
However, the author of this article ignores these incontrovertible facts and says rather cynically: “Khan has a canny ability to mythologise his career choices.”
I think this is unfair to Aamir Khan, who practises what he preaches. He has never got into a controversy of his own making: hasn’t run over pavement dwellers driving drunk, hasn’t slapped fellow guests at a restaurant, hasn’t curried favour with gutter-level politicians to cadge agricultural land out of a government and hasn’t – I believe – lobbied for a Rajya Sabha seat.
The article then observes: “… the sub-genre (of sports biopics) has become a clichéd heap of training montages and early obstacles that are eventually surmounted for predictable victories. The biopic is in danger of becoming the new fantasy movie – a fantasy of individual achievement against a hostile and corrupt system that is designed to hold back Indians. If this system did not exist, films as varied as Bhaag Milkha Bhaag and Dangal argue, Indians would have been sitting at the top of gold medal charts.”
But this is true – Indian athletes do not sit at the top of gold medal charts precisely because of this and many other reasons, principally, the huge asymmetry of opportunities, where marginalised people like the adivasis of Central India or remote mountains do not even have access to a healthy diet, let alone scientific training.
So Dangal represents the stark reality of India today. Let’s also recall that Aamir had done an episode in Styameva Jayate with the real Phogat sisters, just to bring the author back from her fantasy world. Just imagine: had there been thousands of more Khumulwng Tribal Gymnasiums (where Dipa Karmakar trained), how many more Dipas could we have had?
Finally, Aamir Khan is an asset to India who has brought several unknown issues that hurt millions into sharp focus. I would earnestly request you not to allow your website to serve the agenda of Muslim haters by baselessly accusing him of “manipulative film-making”. – Santanu Sinha Chaudhuri
I agree with almost everything the writer says about the bizarre claims and the non-scientific approach in the paper published in a journal of the Indian Centre for Historical Research’s (“’Dancing Girl’ as Parvati is just one of many bizarre claims in ICHR paper on Harappan civilisation”).
However, the writer too seems to have reached her conclusion quickly, without looking at all current scientific evidence.
I recommend she read the book The Lost River: On The Trail of The River Saraswati. This has nothing to do with Shiva or Parvati, but it collates all available information and tries to connect the dots in the simplest manner possible.
Once she reads it, she will probably agree that a majority of the Western-backed scientific community has been trying to connect the dots in an extraordinarily convoluted way, when a much simpler and plausible explanation exists. – Karthik
Pride and prejudice
Smruti Koppikar’s article on the Maratha activism and the recent vandalism by Sambhaji Brigade is well written, exploring the reasons behind the phenomenon (“Maratha pride (and votes): Why the statue of a legendary Marathi playwright was vandalised in Pune”). – Sanjay Marathe
It seems the author of this article does not quite appreciate the role of any leader (“What made MS Dhoni one of India’s greatest captains? He just kept things simple”). The basic responsibilities of a captain that you cited are very important for how a match proceeds and which way it swings.
You seem to see a captain as a poster boy for the media. It is precisely this level of underestimation that assures me of the ignorance illustrated in the article.
The ability to select youngsters and believe in them is what makes great captains. As Wasim Akram has said time and again, what made Imran Khan one of the greatest captains was his intuition about future stars.
The Indian team was great even during the 2007 World Cup, but it had an x-factor under Dhoni’s captaincy that led to 2011 victory.
In shorter formats a captain is indispensable. Just to give you a sense of how important, Dhoni would have had a totally different batting career ( a far superior one) if he was playing under someone else. He decided to give the batting order that solidarity by batting at number 6 or 7.
It was not that Dhoni was successful because he understood that a captain does not matter that much in a chaotic world of media frenzy. He was successful because he was able to gather the sense of the game and make the surroundings and distractions irrelevant. – Archit Singhal