THE STATE OF DENIAL

One sultry afternoon I went to see my doctor in his chamber for some sports related pains and niggles. He prescribed a few medicines. I thought I will buy these medicines from the shop across the clinic before returning home. Accordingly I crossed over to the other side of the street and gave the prescription to the shop boy who was getting the medicines from the shelves. After giving me the packet of medicines he gave me a computerized bill to be paid at the cash counter. An expressionless elderly man seeming like the owner of the shop was sitting behind the counter. As I waited to pay the bill I noticed on top of his counter a bowl brimming with loose change while he was stacking the currency notes in a drawer to his right side. A thought crossed my mind. This was a shop providing medicines. Evidently those who came to his shop were in some kind of discomfort. Somewhat softness of his facial muscles would have done him no harm.   Clearly he was well aware that there was no need of any marketing skills with the positional advantage of his establishment being in the close proximity of a nursing home, a clinic and a few doctors’ chambers in the long stretch of the street. However pushing that thought aside I gave him the bill. I do not remember now how much I was to pay, but I gave him a hundred rupee note. He looked at the amount printed on the bill and asked if I had loose change to settle the full amount consisting of some rupees and some paise. I said I didn’t have the change. He said he didn’t have it either. I was taken aback as the bowl full of loose change was kept there right on top of his counter for anyone to see. I pointed at the bowl to him to say when he had the change, why would he not use some of it to settle my bill? He looked at me sternly and said when I tell you I don’t have change; you have no business looking at that bowl. Needless to say I returned the medicines and came out of the shop feeling shortchanged.

Stanley Cohen is a sociologist who spent many years in Israel before continuing his academic work in Britain. . His book States of Denial: Knowing about Atrocities and Suffering reveals how central denial is in all human life.  He asserts that it is denial that is "normal" and an ability to see the truth and act accordingly is rare, whether in individuals or in governments.' Blocking out, turning a blind eye, shutting off, not wanting to know, wearing blinkers, seeing what we want to see ... these are all expressions of 'denial'.

Do these phenomena have anything in common? When we deny, are we aware of what we are doing or is this an unconscious defence mechanism to protect us from unwelcome truths? Can there be cultures of denial? Is denial always so bad - or do we need positive illusions to retain our sanity?

In Mahabharata, when Drona, his guru and adversary asked Yudhishthira, if Aswatthama was dead, Yudhishthira confirmed it. Drona meant Aswatthama, his son; in fact, it was an elephant named Aswatthama who had been killed by Bhima, to which Yudhishthira indistinctly alluded. Before this episode, Yudhishthira’s chariot had stayed at a height of four fingers’ breadth from the surface of the earth; after he had said that untruth, his chariot touched the earth." a reflection of the stepping down from the moral high he lived in.

In state-craft, denials or lies point out that there is no permanent dharma - one man’s dharma could be another man’s adharma. Or even that one man’s dharma at one point in time could be diametrically opposite to his dharma at another point in time. Such flexibility shows the inclusive nature of men’s character that the Aryan society lived in. Perhaps this is the philosophy that our present day politicians have imbibed and use it unabashedly in its modern version.

I remember listening to a popular Bony-M song called “Sad Movies Always Make Me Cry” in which a girl goes home crying because she saw her boyfriend at a movie with another girl. When her mother asks her what’s wrong, she says “… to keep from telling a lie, I just said, ‘sad movies always make me cry’. It was technically true, but deceitful.

Denial is probably one of the best known defense mechanisms, used often to describe situations in which people seem unable to face reality or admit an obvious truth. Denial is an outright refusal to admit or recognize that something has occurred or is currently occurring. Drug addicts or alcoholics often deny that they have a problem, while victims of traumatic events may deny that the event ever occurred.

“God hath given you one face, and you make yourselves another,” ―observed William Shakespeare in Hamlet.

History is replete with examples of people, groups or societies denying history.

In recent times there are endless instances right from Park Street rape being termed as a “sajano ghotona", (fabricated) to denying incidents of violence elsewhere to the extent of branding these merely as optical illusions even when shown in electronic media. While  a 13-year-old girl dies when thrown out after being molested by the staff and some passengers while travelling in a bus in Moga,  a Punjab Minister claims that the victim’s death was 'god’s will'.

We as a Nation have been in a state of denial for years. Democracy has become an unchallengeable fig leaf for our failures. It allows under-performance and ineffective governance and a cover for the criminalization of politics. Several members of parliament and state assemblies have criminal charges pending against them.

 “Occasionally words must serve to veil the facts. But let this happen in such a way that no one become aware of it; or, if it should be noticed, excuses must be at hand to be produced immediately.” says Machiavelli one of the founders of modern political science.

Thanks to our democratic resilience, they get away with such untruths, half truths and denials and when cornered, TV reporting notwithstanding, accuse media and others that they have been ‘misquoted’!

“It's discouraging to think how many people are shocked by honesty and how few by deceit.”  said Sir Noël Coward in his 1945 film Blithe Spirit.

A neighbour came to the gate of Mulla Nasreddin's yard. The Mulla went to meet him outside.

"Would you mind, Mulla," the neighbour asked, "lending me your donkey today? I have some goods to transport to the next town."

The Mulla didn't feel inclined to lend out the animal to that particular man, however. So, not to seem rude, he answered:

"I'm sorry, but I've already lent him to somebody else."

All of a sudden the donkey could be heard braying loudly behind the wall of the yard.

"But Mulla," the neighbour exclaimed. "I can hear it behind that wall!"

"Whom do you believe," the Mulla replied indignantly, "the donkey or your Mulla?”

  

QUI NON STULTUS?

Long time back as a very junior officer I was called upon to perform duty during the visit of the then Prime Minister to a sub divisional town for a political rally where lakhs of people were supposed to gather. As is the wont in the arrangements of this hype and dimension, several agencies were involved in briefing the officers and men concerning their duties and responsibilities prior to the event. One such briefing was to be done by an officer of the rank of Special Superintendent from Intelligence Branch. We all were dreading a long discourse on the principles and the elements of VVIP security as the April sun was already beating down on us. A pleasant looking officer turned up dressed in smart casuals. His authoritative demeanour and intent looking eyes conveyed an impression to me that he meant business as I prepared myself for a long haul.  He began: ‘How many of you are doing such duty for the first time?’ I was the one amongst some others who raised their hands. With a benign smile he looked vaguely in our direction. ‘How many of you have done this duty before?’ Quite a large number of them raised their hands. ‘So those who have done this duty before will brief the ones who are new’. And with these words the briefing was over. We looked at each other stunned with this ‘brief’ briefing but relieved that we didn’t have to stand in the heat for long. We exchanged glances, smiled and perhaps laughed mildly and dispersed.

Molla Nasreddin was believed to have lived and died during the 13th century in the Seljuk Sultanate of Rum, in today's Turkey. He is considered a populist philosopher and wise man, remembered for his funny stories and anecdotes with subtle humour..

 

Once Nasreddin was invited to deliver a sermon. When he got on the pulpit, he asked, Do you know what I am going to say? The audience replied "no", so he announced, I have no desire to speak to people who don't even know what I will be talking about! and left. The people felt embarrassed and called him back again the next day. This time, when he asked the same question, the people replied yes. So Nasreddin said, Well, since you already know what I am going to say, I won't waste any more of your time! and left. The people were really perplexed. They decided to try one more time and once again invited the Molla to speak the following week. Once again he asked the same question – Do you know what I am going to say? Now the people were prepared and so half of them answered "yes" while the other half replied "no". So Nasreddin said Let the half who know what I am going to say, tell it to the half who don't, and left.

Who is not a fool? (Qui non stultus?) – says the Roman poet Horace (65-8 B.C.) in ‘Satires’, a collection of his satirical poems exploring the secrets of human happiness and literary perfection.

Humour is the great diffuser of tense situations.

It may perhaps have been the reason why in medieval times or even later, monarchs and wealthy used to appoint court jesters. The European words used to denote him are numerous, reflecting the mercurial man behind them: fool, buffoon, clown, jongleur, jogleor, joculator, sot, stultor, scurra, fou, fol, truhan, mimus, histrio, morio. Distinction was made between fools and clowns, or country bumpkins. The fool's status was one of privilege within a royal or noble household. His folly could be regarded as the raving of a madman but was often deemed to be divinely inspired. The 'natural' fool was touched by God. The relationship was often very close and amiable, and the jester was almost invariably a cherished presence. He was no rebel or revolutionary. His detached stance allowed him to take the side of the victim in order to curb the excesses of the system without ever trying to overthrow it. There are many stories which show a jester as the only person who could counsel a stubborn king, and as such the myth of the court jester suggests that jesters could act as a check on the whimsical power of absolute monarchy.

‘We have all seen how an appropriate and well-timed joke can sometimes influence even grim tyrants. . . . The most violent tyrants put up with their clowns and fools, though these often made them the butt of open insults.’ —Desiderius Erasmus, Praise of Folly.

In Europe the most eminent jesters were household names, and stories about their jokes and tricks circulated freely.

Sancho Panza, Don Quixote’s squire in the novel Don Quixote by Miguel de Cervantes, is a short, pot-bellied peasant whose gross appetite, common sense, and vulgar wit serve as a foil to the mad idealism of his master. He is famous for his many pertinent proverbs. Sancho provides comments throughout the novel, known as sanchismos that are a combination of broad humour, ironic Spanish proverbs, and earthy wit.

In India too in recent times electronic media has made some of the comedians like Raju Srivastava, Kapil Sharma, Vir Das popular and they command a huge fan following, though not in the same league as their ancestors in the past.

Gopal Bhar was a legendary court jester in medieval Bengal. He was in the court of Raja Krishnachandra, the famous king of Nadia. Numerous stories about his exploits are narrated to this day. The stories are short, beautiful, and humorous and have a specific social message. His stories are comparable with those of Birbal and Molla Nasreddin.

When I was a kid, my father used to get me a monthly magazine ‘Balak’ perhaps published from Patna. In every issue of this magazine there used to be a story captioned ‘Mithila ke Birbal: Gonu Jha’. I do not remember the stories now but I do have an impression of his being a "Pratyutpannamati" (ready-witted) character. He was a contemporary of Hari Singh, King of Mithila  in the 13th century. There are several humorous folktales about him, depicting him as a witty and wise man.

Birbal, an advisor in the court of the Mughal Emperor Akbar is mostly known for the folk tales that focus on wit. By the end of Akbar's reign, local folk tales emerged portraying him as being extremely clever and witty. These tales involve him outsmarting rival courtiers and sometimes even Akbar, using only his intelligence and cunning, often with giving witty and humorous responses and impressing Akbar.

Garlapati Tenali Ramakrishna popularly known as Tenali Rama and Vikata Kavi, was a court-poet of the Vijayanagara Empire in the 16th century. He was one of the Ashtadiggajas who belonged to the court of Krishnadevaraya in Vijayanagar. He was known for his wit and impressive poetry. 

An offence was registered against Bollywood producer-director Sanjay Gupta, Balaji Motion Pictures and glamsham.com, a movie portal, by the Versova police on March 1, 2012 for the alleged misuse of the name of Mumbai Police Commissioner's office to promote Gupta's film Shootout at Wadala. He had issued an invitation card for a press conference, which was made to look like a summons from the CP. However, Gupta contended that there was a disclaimer issued by them at the back of the invitation card.

"This is an innovative invitation. That's it," Justice A V Nirgude said. "The police officers who registered the offence have lost their sense of humour," he wrote in.

In fact we all have. We are living in a time when an innocuous forward of a cartoon or a remark on twitter or face book or any social media site at once attracts provisions of IT Act or other such laws. Millions mourning the Charlie Hebdo tragedy have roared “the pen is mightier than the sword” – and that pen should always be free to write whatever it wants. Perhaps no longer.  We all have forgotten how to laugh at ourselves. And those who claim to represent us have assumed that we have no sense of humour. We're now so sensitive about everything – from a word in a movie or song, to a tweet, to interpretation of history, to art, to almost anything at all – that we react with anger and end up destroying public assets and endangering human lives. Every issue can be politicized, all in the name of the “common man”. The sunshine and the cheer, the mirth and the laughter seem to have evaporated from our collective imagination long since.

It feels as if 2015 is the year when a war has been declared on humour, with laughter replaced by the curiously modern disease of being terminally offended.

Foolery, sir, does walk about the orb like the sun, it shines everywhere.—Twelfth Night 

Not anymore, Shakespeare sir. These are not your times now.

Your profound and poetic expression may be subjected to an ear shattering prime-time debate and questioned at full throttle ….

                                              …..because the Nation wants to know….

ONE YEAR LATER...

How many words does one speak in a minute, in an hour, in a day or in a lifetime? Or how much does one talk? ‘Even if you think you don't, you do’, says Simpsons writer Rob Lazebnik. “Talking is like drinking a great cabernet.”

Social psychologists say the people who are most likely to be over-talkers are:

•      People with Asperger's-type disorders (a disorder that amongst other symptoms,         exhibits a restricted range of interests and/or repetitive behaviour)

•       People who are anxious and babble out of nerves, trying to please the person they are    talking to.

•       Narcissists, who think that what they have to say is very important and entertaining.

So what category shall we put our politicians in--nervous, anxious, narcissists, suffering from some disorder or simply entertainers? Why do our politicians talk so much: more so when they are making public speeches, and are swept by their own rhetoric and the applause and adulation that follows. A speech is defined as a formal address, delivered to an audience that seeks to convince, persuade, inspire or inform.

In the world chronicle there have been epoch making and landmark speeches and powerful orations that have changed the course of the history of mankind.

Moses’ spoke of God’s Ten Commandments on Mount Sinai which concern matters of fundamental importance in both Judaism and Christianity: the greatest obligation (to worship only God), the greatest injury to a person (murder), the greatest injury to family bonds (adultery), the greatest injury to commerce and law (bearing false witness), the greatest inter-generational obligation (honor to parents), the greatest obligation to community (truthfulness), the greatest injury to movable property (theft).

The Funeral Oration of Pericles in 431 BC redefined oration and inspired the Athenian people cleverly honouring the fallen soldiers while simultaneously galvanizing the living citizens into more action to ensure their death was not in vain invoking a deep sense of sorrow while simultaneously setting up feelings of national pride and faith among the audience.

Socrates delivered his apology speech during his trial and is an oration masterpiece as he defended himself in 399 BC against the charges of "corrupting the young, and by not believing in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other daimonia that are novel." “The unexamined life is not worth living.” It is such a profound statement attributed to Socrates. True. People who do examine their lives, who think about where they've been, how they got here, and where they're going, are much happier people.

 

In his Gettysburg address on the 19^th November 1863 Abraham Lincoln spoke of ‘a new birth of freedom’. Over time, this speech with its ending - government of the People, by the People, for the People - has come to define democracy itself.

 

Swami Vivekananda speaking at the World’s Parliament of Religions in Chicago on 11^th September, 1893, created history by his soul-stirring address  as he began: ‘Sisters and Brothers of America', Newspapers like the New York Herald wrote of him saying “Vivekananda is undoubtedly the greatest figure in the Parliament of Religions. After hearing him we feel how foolish it is to send missionaries to this learned nation". The world celebrates this day as World Brotherhood Day as a mark of respect to that speech he made.

 

Winston Churchill delivered one of the most powerful and unusual speeches of all times during WW-II, at the threat of a Nazi invasion. On June 4th, 1940, he spoke before the House of Commons to warn them of this grim possibility. The speech was immediately recognized to be historic. One of Churchill's secretaries noted in his diary "A magnificent oration, which obviously moved the House." ‘…we shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills ,we shall never surrender…’

In August 1963, Martin Luther King electrified America with his momentous ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, dramatically delivered from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial. His soaring rhetoric demanding racial justice and an integrated society became a mantra for the black community and is as familiar to subsequent generations of Americans as the US Declaration of Independence.

 

‘Tryst with Destiny’ delivered by Jawaharlal Nehru, towards midnight on 15 August 1947  is considered to be one of the greatest speeches of all times and to be a landmark oration that captures the essence of the triumphant culmination of our independence struggle against the British Empire . “At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom”.

Of course, any list of great speeches would be incomplete without a mention of Shakespeare, the master of rhetoric, the Bard himself. ‘Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears’ a line of a speech by Mark Antony in Julius Caesar is one of his most famous lines from all of his works. Comparisons have been drawn between this speech and political speeches throughout history in terms of the rhetorical devices employed to win over a crowd.

 At the end of his oration, Antony utters to himself, "Now let it work. Mischief, thou art afoot. Take thou what course thou wilt."

The Telegraph, Calcutta in its lead news ‘He who lives by Twitter shall…’ datelined New Delhi May 19 observes that Prime Minister Modi, ‘susceptible to being carried away by tumultuous receptions abroad appears to have crossed the 140 character rekha’ (sms has 140 character limit) when first in Shanghai and then in Seoul he said that ‘earlier, you felt ashamed to be born in India’. “The Prime Minister, true to his style of dividing India ‘before me’ and ‘after me’ in the manner of messiahs, was trying to draw a distinction between the country he inherited and the one he rebuilt in the past 12 months” says the lead news article.

Will it be a landmark piece of oration that will keep reminding us Indians of our shame at being born in India before 26 May 2014 --- 

                          …till one greater man

Restore us, and regain the blissful seat…

                                     --Paradise Lost: John Milton

BEING SELFISH

The word ‘selfish’ appears to have been coined in the Sixteenth century by Presbyterians. In the Seventeenth century, synonyms included self-seeking, self-ended and self-full. The English Dictionary defines this adjective as ‘devoted to or caring only for oneself, concerned primarily with one’s own interest, benefits, welfare etc., regardless of others.’

On November 15, 1903, Charles Ponzi an Italian born businessman arrived in Boston, aboard the S.S. Vancouver. ”I landed in this country with $2.50 in cash and $1million in hopes, and those hopes never left me’, he told The New York Times. By July 1920, he had made millions. His ‘Ponzi scheme’ promised clients a 50% profit within 45 days or 100% profit within 90 days. In reality Ponzi was paying early investors using the investments of later investors, a practice known as ‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’. People were mortgaging their homes and investing their life savings. Most did not take their profits, but reinvested. His scheme collapsed, costing his investors $20 million and financially ruining several homes.

Joseph Conrad’s Lord Jim is regarded as one of the 100 best English-language novels of the 20th century. Jim a young British seaman becomes first mate on the Patna, a ship full of pilgrims travelling to Mecca for the hajj. When the ship starts rapidly taking on water and disaster seems imminent, Jim joins his captain and other crew members in abandoning the ship and its passengers, thus committing the ultimate sin for a naval officer to abandon ship, particularly when passengers or crew are still on board. The court strips him of his navigation command certificate for dereliction of duty. Jim is angry with himself, both for his moment of selfishness, and for missing an opportunity to be a 'hero'. What will this mean for Jim who is about to face his destiny, which is relentless and inescapable?

Sir Philip Sidney, an English poet, scholar, and soldier, is remembered as one of the most prominent figures of the Elizabethan age. In the battle fighting for the Protestant cause against the Spanish, he was shot. While lying wounded he gave his water to another wounded soldier, saying, "Thy necessity is yet greater than mine." 

All the religions of the world, their Holy Books and scriptures, as also the society, extol and applaud the virtue of selflessness, service and sacrifice

“Selfish” is a bad word in most people's books. As a society, we frown upon anyone we think of as selfish. But oriented around survival it’s in our nature to take care of our own needs first. Some psychologists believe that when you take care of yourself first, you show up as a healthy, grounded person in life. Being called selfish doesn’t feel like a compliment, but the trait can actually make you a better and a happier person, psychology experts say. If you can’t take care of yourself, then you can’t care for others. "Putting yourself first is not a negative quality; it’s your job to take care of yourself and get what you need. When you’re able to focus within, you’re much more authentic and much happier. It is your responsibility to make yourself happy. Take ownership of your happiness.” Being selfish is so critical.

On board my flight, the air-hostess makes announcements every time: The cabin pressure is controlled for your comfort, should it change radically in flight, oxygen compartments will automatically open in the panel above your seat. Pull the mask over your mouth and nose and secure with the elastic band like this. If you are travelling with children or are seated next to someone who needs assistance, place the mask on yourself first…..

A hit and run is a high risk, high reward offensive strategy used in baseball. It uses a stolen base attempt to try to place the defending in-fielders out of position for an attempted base hit. In law, hit-and-run is the act of causing or contributing to a traffic accident, such as colliding with a person or fixture, and failing to stop and identify oneself afterwards. It is an offence^.

Jolly LLB is a power-packed courtroom drama that revolves around the case of a rich guy, who drove over a pathway, killing several labourers in the bargain. This film celebrates the spirit of the common man seeking justice and impartiality. Underneath its humour is an angry critique of the system, so easily manipulated by the rich in their own self-interest and so difficult to penetrate for the poor who are the victims.

A popular superstar sentenced like an ordinary mortal thirteen years after the trial commenced, is not merely breaking news. TV anchors, newsreaders, tabloids, newspapers, social media and every other person out there, become the judge, advocate and executioner of public sentiment. In some cases there is an irrepressible glee watching a celebrity fall. There are others who would firmly stand by the celebrity in his hour of crisis.

 
As Suhel Seth says: ‘In the coming days, many pundits will tell us about the intricacies of the law; there will be others who will pontificate on the robustness of our judicial system, while few will spare a thought for the victims. We will then return to life as we know it.’ 

After all, you’re responsible for your own happiness.