Raging old men....

We live so long now that we have not one but two crisis in our lives – a mid life crisis at forty and a late life crisis at seventy!

Everyone knows what a mid life crisis is. In 1965, the Canadian psychologist Elliott Jaques coined the term midlife crisis to describe the trauma many individuals in the developed world felt around the age of 40, when they faced the imminence of old age and, eventually, death. In the traditional narrative of the crisis, individuals — mostly men — panic and make extreme compensations for this reality. Everyone also knows that the solution that is common to this crisis varies from a drastic change in lifestyle- a new, young blonde wife or a red racing car.

The late life crisis is different yet similar. At seventy most men have completed a successful career, amassed a modest fortune, built their dream house, married off their children, played enough golf and dandled umpteen grandchildren on their knees. Now as they contemplate the years ahead they ask themselves “Now what?”

This dilemma that afflicts a few in my generation was brought home to me when a friend of five decades dropped by to see me a few days ago. Here he was a technocrat who had had a successful career, made some creative contributions to the country, amassed adequate wealth, lived in an affluent suburb and was quoted often—but now not often enough- by the press as an elder statesman of his profession. He was relatively healthy but of course heir, like most men of his age, to varying afflictions. He had no major problems that I could discern. Yet..

“Honestly”, he confided in me, “some days I get up and ask myself why? What’s left?”

Looking around I found the late life crisis had caught many of my contemporaries by surprise. Yet some had found ways to cope with it. They had found their red racing cars or young blondes too. Of course, they were different at seventy than at forty! One had turned to spirituality and religious learning and now spent time teaching Gita to avid listeners; another had retreated to a bucolic retreat near the sea to a life of contemplation and reflection; one had found a new burst of energy and enthusiasm and now travelled the world helping volunteers teach the young and yet another had immersed himself in political activism and a renewed interest in old hobbies. They all seemed to have weathered this late life crisis.

But there was a common thread running through their lives too. It seemed to me that all of them had refused to go “gentle into the night”! They all refused to give up. Each day still brought new challenges, new ideas, new inspirations. In the past they had looked for results of their efforts, now they simply did what they enjoyed or felt deeply about.

And the advice they followed was what Dylan Thomas addressed to his octogenarian father, whose eyesight and general health were failing, where he urges his father to "burn and rave at close of day"--rather than surrendering meekly to it.

“Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Though wise men at their end know dark is right,
Because their words had forked no lightning they
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Good men, the last wave by, crying how bright
Their frail deeds might have danced in a green bay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

Wild men who caught and sang the sun in flight,
And learn, too late, they grieved it on its way,
Do not go gentle into that good night.

Grave men, near death, who see with blinding sight
Blind eyes could blaze like meteors and be gay,
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

And you, my father, there on the sad height,
Curse, bless me now with your fierce tears, I pray.
Do not go gentle into that good night.
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.”

Marching backwards

It was not too long ago that Indian weddings lasted for over 5-10 days with hordes of friends and family descending on the hapless parents as they prepared to give their daughters hand away in marriage. Not only were the festivities long drawn and expensive, the parents of the bride also had to find adequate resources for the dowry that was then, explicitly and now implicitly, demanded by the bridegrooms family.That was then but now these wasteful ways are making an unfortunate comeback..

There have always been many many rituals in an Indian wedding. There were the ones before the marriage: the engagement, Barni Bandhwana, Mamara, Sangeet Sandhya, Tilak ceremony and Mehendi Lagwana. During the marriage festivities, there were the Barat Nikase, VarMala,Aart,Baasi Jawari, Kanya daan, Panigrahana Hathlewa,Gathabandhan,Laja Homa, Saptapadi and Vidaai. At the new home , there was the darshan, Dwar Rokai, Grihas Pravesh, Mook Dikhai and Pheri. All these rituals had one thing in common- they all required the expenditure of considerable sums of money by the bride’s parents. A daughter’s wedding was thus a crushing burden and many a parent had to go deep in debt to pay for these traditions

Of course defenders of these expensive traditions, and there were many, argued that the Indian shastras demanded these rituals, that this was once in a lifetime occurrence, that it provided the far flung family an occasion to meet—and they could hardly stay for a day after having travelled thousands of miles—that it was a marriage to two families not of two people etc. These arguments held sway for many years till dowry deaths in rural areas and the increasing debt burdens became a national disgrace

It was the national independence movement- and Pandit Nehru in particular—who took up the cause of reforming the Hindu marriage practices against considerable opposition form within his own party. The Hindu Code Bill, which intended to provide a civil code in place of the body of Hindu personal law, was presented to the Constituent Assembly on 9 April 1948. But it caused such a great deal of controversy that it was subsequently broke down to three more specialized bills: the Hindu Marriage Bill which outlawed polygamy and contained provisions dealing with inter caste marriages and divorce procedures; the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Bill had as its main thrust the adoption of girls, which till then had been little practiced; and the Hindu Succession Bill which placed daughters on the same footing as widows and sons where the inheritance of family property was concerned.


Dowry was and remains a social evil but continues to be a common practice in almost every part of India. Women at the time of marriage are expected to bring with them jewellery, cash and even consumer durables as part of dowry to the in-laws and they are subsequently ill-treated, often violently, if they fail to do so. Anti-dowry laws in India, enacted in 1961, prohibit the request, payment or acceptance of a dowry, "as consideration for the marriage". where "dowry" is defined as a gift demanded or given as a precondition for a marriage. Gifts given without a precondition are not considered dowry, and are legal. Asking or giving of dowry can be punished by an imprisonment of up to six months, or a fine of up to Rs. 5000. But the laws themselves have done nothing to halt dowry transactions. Many of the victims are burnt to death - they are doused in kerosene and set fire to. Routinely the in-laws claim that the death happened simply due to an accident. According to data complied by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), a total of 2,276 female suicides due to dowry disputes were reported in 2006, that is six a day on an average. A total of 7,618 cases were registered under Dowry Death in 2006, while 6,787 cases were registered in 2005, showing a gradual increase in this sad statistic

The original concept of streedhan was based on providing a newly wed girl with some things that she could cherish and call her own. Today this concept has been vulgarized to symbolize all the things that not even the bridegroom, but his family wants to have as their own. India’s burgeoning middle class - now 300 million strong - are turning weddings into showcases of their growing disposable incomes and newfound appetites for the goodies of the global marketplace. The largesse has spawned an $11 billion wedding industry, growing at 25 percent annually and beginning to rival the US industry valued at $50 billion. It is estimated that the average budget for a middle class wedding ceremony in India today is $34,000 while the upper-middle and rich classes are known to spend upward of $2 million. This doesn’t include cash and valuables given as part of a dowry. Thus on average people earning a total of $6,000 / yr spend about $34,000 on a wedding. In contrast, the average wedding costs in the US are around $27,000, with a range of $25,000 to $30,000 generally accepted as accurate.

What has changed from the 1970s is the kind of demands being made on the bride's parents. Apart from "gifts" that are nothing short of extortion, the demands now involve the kind of wedding that will take place. There is a kind of pan-Indian wedding that is emerging that is dominated by the north Indian Punjabi style of celebration. Thus sangeet and mehndi are now a must at every wedding. Ostentation is in, regardless of what you can afford. You don't have to be a Mittal or a Chatwal to imagine that you are a prince or princess for that one day. Wedding organizers have everything ready from faux palaces to exotic locations. And ostensibly sensible young people are agreeing to these tamashas in the belief that there is nothing wrong with "living it up" for that one day. Gaudy displays of wealth and going one better than the neighbors seems to be the main motivation of these noveau- riche. Some few get dragged into these displays- their original intent of a simple wedding is soon expanded as family and friends suggest additions and rituals till it becomes a “tamasha” with the poor parents footing the bill and often going deep into debt. If it was only them, one could dismiss their antics as being driven by the lunatic fringe of show offs, but unfortunately these practices are slowly creeping back into rest of the country as well. Dowry demands are rising even though they are illegal and ostentatious displays of wealth in weddings are making a comeback with paid dancers and performers. In one case, the parents even organized rehearsals to imitate a wedding in a bollywood movie.

Customs like dowry can end only when the people involved, the young men and women, decide to go against the tide, demand simpler weddings and say a firm "no" to the vulgar demands that constitute a dowry. But today all these reforms seem to have fallen by the wayside and the reformers everywhere are in retreat. And worse, the charge to go backwards to the past is being led by the more educated and the better off. It is the NRIs around the world who are reverting back to these old rituals and customs- many times without understanding them at all. The modern Indian at home too is not a reformer. If anything he is a retrograde traditionalist.

But the real tragedy of the increasingly consumerist culture in which we live today is that young people, who one would expect are capable of thinking outside the box, who should have the courage to assert what they want, are either going on unquestioningly with wasteful traditions, or are even endorsing them. As a result, any desire to curb expenditure that existed in a generation that came out of the National Movement is now so thoroughly buried that one wonders whether it will ever surface again.

Marriages may not be made in heaven, but they should not end up sending people into the hellhole of lifelong debt and misery. Perhaps it is time for another reform movement starting with ones refusal to participate in these ostentatious displays.

The Sporting Life

It is said that nations reveal themselves in their choice of sports and the way they play them. David Brooks in an interesting article points out the centrality of sports in the cultural and social life of a country.

Of course, people in any country participate in sports for a variety of reasons—health and fitness, stress management, socialization, relaxation, and others. But one of the more important reasons is character development. “Sport builds character” is an often used phrase. The Victorians, who were behind the idea - and who invented most of the sports we play - believed it bred every virtue you can think of: self- confidence, respect for the rules, a sense of fair play, physical bravery, grace under pressure, equanimity in defeat and magnanimity in victory. Indeed it is argued that sports culture influences young people as they are growing up.It discourages whining, and rewards self-discipline. It teaches self-control and its own form of justice, which has a more powerful effect than anything taught in the classroom.

Every country has a favorite sport which in a certain sense defines its essence. The concentration of a country on a particular sport also pervades its entire culture and mind set that emerges in interesting and contrasting ways

Thus the US, which does have a number of favorite sports- baseball, basketball, football – but football remains the quintessential American sport and defines its character. American football is played over four quarters and lasts one hour in terms of official playing time although it drags on usually for a couple of hours with all the interruptions for TV ads and injuries. It is a game of power and strategy where each player has to function as a part of the effort at all times. While there is a coin tossing captain, the fact is that the entire effort is coordinated and led by a quarterback. And the important thing in US football is that there is always a result- there is always a winner and a loser.

By contrast, European football or soccer takes only ninety minutes with one break. There is a captain but the only role he seems to play is to wear a small armband and to remonstrate with the referee when one of his team is being turned out of the game. The eleven men do play as a team but winning more often relies on individual brilliance than any coordinated attacks. Also it is not sure that each game will end in a result- a draw is an equally acceptable outcome.

Indian cricket, however, lasts 40 hours- yes 40 hours- spread over five days. Even the shortened version of the game- the one dayer- lasts for 8 hours with breaks for morning tea, lunch and evening tea. For the non aficionado, it is often difficult to make out if anything is happening on the field for long periods of time. It is difficult to determine who is the leader of the team as everyone seems to congregate to offer advice on how to proceed. The external elements play a major part whether it is the state of the pitch or the possibility of rain during the match. And, of course, even after five days, it is equally possible that there is no result – called a draw- and the opposing teams move on to another locale to repeat the five day game and perhaps another draw.

Growing up, children in these countries must imbibe the culture and rhythm of these popular sports. Thus is it any wonder that American kids and adults are impatient for results in quick time and want a clear winner or loser? Or that the Europeans tend to accept draw as a fair conclusion to any combat and are willing to wait for another occasion to find a result. Or that the Indians learn patience and are willing to accept the influence of external environment on their lives or the absence of motion as normal?

Throughout Western history, Professor Gillespie of Duke University, argues, there have been three major athletic traditions. First, there was the Greek tradition. Greek sports were highly individualistic. There was little interest in teamwork. Instead sports were supposed to inculcate aristocratic virtues like courage and endurance. They gave individuals a way to achieve eternal glory.

Then, there was the Roman tradition. In ancient Rome, free men did not fight in the arena. Roman sports were a spectacle organized by the government. The free Romans watched while the slaves fought and were slaughtered. The entertainment emphasized the awesome power of the state.

Finally, there was the British tradition. In the Victorian era, elite schools used sports to form a hardened ruling class. Unlike the Greeks, the British placed tremendous emphasis on team play and sportsmanship. If a soccer team committed a foul, it would withdraw its goalie to permit the other team to score. The object was to inculcate a sense of group loyalty, honor and rule-abidingness — traits that were important to a class trying to manage a far-flung empire.

American sports like football, Gillespie argues, have an ethos which is a fusion of these three traditions. These sports teach that individual effort leads to victory, a useful lesson in a work-oriented society. But as in sports, it is necessary to navigate the tension between team loyalty and individual glory.

Cricket played in the British tradition had always emphasized team work and loyalty. It was said that “The battle of Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eton” But when the cult of the amateur was replaced by the money culture of the professional, the team ethos rapidly frayed.

But now sports in every country has become too Romanized. Seasons have become too long and the arenas too gargantuan. Athletes have become a separate gladiator class, and the recruitment process gives them an undue sense of their own worth. Individual players – be they football quarterbacks, soccer stars or graceful batsmen- are now bought and sold for the different leagues at annual auctions. Does this remind one of the slave auctions a hundred years ago in the deep South of the US? A cult of “win at any cost” now pervades the entire sports scene and incidents of ball tampering, ball handling and use of performance enhancement drugs have become a regular feature. As one coach sardonically put it “winning may not be everything, but losing is nothing”. Spectators too have been reduced to an anonymous mass of passive consumers of other people’s excellence.

It is indeed a far cry from sports inculcating good habits like self discipline, team loyalty and hard work in the citizenry of a country..

The sins of the fathers…

Sometimes the sins of the fathers do dog their offsprings and in unintended ways. So it is with fathers and their daughters.

Even as most fathers laud the career success of their daughters, they simultaneously fret that she may lack completeness in her life in the absence of a husband and children. And this dilemma only increases with time as, with every professional advancement, the daughter becomes even more difficult to find a mate for. And yet this predicament is at least partly of the fathers making.

Let me explain. In an earlier generation and during the freedom struggle, one of the leading beliefs among the freedom fighters was that the country would not advance without the education of women, that backwardness could only be cured by making sure that women had equal rights and opportunities, that much of societies ills – dowry , sati, etc—stemmed from a lack of economic independence among women. Thus in this generation there was a special emphasis on the education of girls. and that they were treated on par with the sons. Our generation, too, had taken this to heart. I remember telling my children that they should have a professional education. Underlying this was the belief that if the daughters had an education, they would have economic independence and hence not be subject to infliction of hurt by demanding in laws, an unjust husband and that even in case of widowhood; they would be able to support their family by themselves. That was the original theory but as in all theories, it had unintended consequences.

As these daughters grew, they took their education seriously and were dogged in their pursuit of professional excellence. And they became independent in every way including the search for a mate. This was after all the era of equal rights for women.

Of course, most fathers in this generation had originally only wanted their daughters to treat education as a sort of a safety net and not as a profession. They were to be educated but then marry and settle down as normal housewives. For that was the normal tenor of life. What these modern fathers had not bargained for was that this education would lead their daughters to pursue careers with as much zest and passion as their male siblings. This is the kernel of the dilemma today.

These educated daughters far from agreeing to settle down to felicitous domesticity, started querying whether sacrificing a professional career they had worked so hard to develop, should be so easily given up for just any husband. And as they progressed upwards in their professional careers, finding a suitable match became increasingly difficult in their busy lives. Their ambivalence was made worse by looking at some of their contemporaries who had studied to become lawyers or doctors but who had had to give these professions up due to demands of marriage. Many had chosen to follow their husbands sacrificing their budding careers for his. Others who had chosen to follow dual path careers found life difficult when children arrived. Balancing motherhood, wifehood and a career brought pressures they were not really willing to embrace eagerly.

So they dallied hoping against hope for a resolution. But time only made the quandary worse. Of course not all faced this dilemma- many did find their own mates and settled down to domestic life. But for many women now in their thirties, the remaining options start narrowing rapidly.

Most still hoped to find a mate who was mature and independent and close to their imagined prince charming and one not afraid of aggressive, successful females.My own hard charging cardiologist realized her predicament when her parents died and she had no siblings. She had always been an aggressive career driven person but approaching her forties she realized she was all alone. So in a typical organized fashion she logged on to many of the dating sites and within two years found her soul mate. She is now married with a beautiful son and pursuing her profession as a research scientist. So it is possible but needs first, recognition of the issue and then persistence in finding a solution.

Another approach is articulated by Lori Gottlieb in a controversial article who posits that women need to accept men who are “Just good enough husband” material. “You have a fulfilling job, a great group of friends, the perfect apartment, and no shortage of dates. So what if you haven’t found The One just yet. Surely he’ll come along, right? But what if he doesn’t? Or even worse, what if he already has, but you just didn’t realize it?”

Maybe single women everywhere needed to stop chasing the elusive Prince Charming and instead go for Mr. Good Enough. Most women keep holding out for deep romantic love in the fantasy that this level of passionate intensity will make them happier. Another opines “I would say even if he’s not the love of your life, make sure he’s someone you respect intellectually, makes you laugh, appreciates you … I bet there are plenty of these men in the older, overweight, and bald category (which they all eventually become anyway).” In short marrying Mr. Good Enough might be an equally viable option, especially if you’re looking for a stable, reliable life companion.

Some women have opted to skip the husband and marriage routine altogether. A number of women I know have gone ahead and adopted a child even without a husband. Times have changed indeed and this is no longer frowned upon even in traditional societies like India. Of course they do face the problem of all single mothers albeit with a difference in this case the child is really wanted and the father would not run away. A supporting family is normally a bulwark but the absence of a male figure growing up would remain leaving at least some lack in the child’s life.

Or they could become like some women who have everything —career success, economic independence, and physical freedom. Everything that is except a husband and perhaps a child.

Some of these fathers, who had proudly lauded the success of their daughters, often rued in private, their liberal decision to educate women. It is as if they were saying, we should have educated them but not so much!

But most of the fathers I know were unashamedly proud of their daughter’s achievements and were adamant that if they were to do it again, they would still go ahead and educate their daughters so that they could achieve their potential even if it meant a lifestyle different from the traditional one they had hoped for.

Women who have everything…

A few days ago I was searching for a gift for a friend of mine when I suddenly realized that she really had everything and that there was nothing that I could find for her as a gift that she did not already have!

She belonged to a new and growing group of elite women that I know who have everything. They all have achieved tremendous personal success in their careers. And they are unique because their rise has come through their own efforts rather than through family connections or businesses. Many of them are now at the height of their professions. One runs her own international garment business, another is chief executive of biomedical company, a third is head of a large NGO. All have reached the pinnacle of success while still in their fifties and were the cynosure of all eyes in the society they moved and incurred the envy of their contemporaries.

While successful they all shared some rather interesting traits. Most of them were divorced—a divorce initiated generally by them at a rather early stage in their marriage. Since they were all now in their fifties, it was clear that their divorces would have caused them grief in the traditional society they lived in and that this would have been done against the advice of their parents. Here I am speculating.. But the very fact that they had gone ahead with the divorce was an early indication of the steel and determination that lay beneath their mild exteriors. Clearly in most cases, they felt that marriage was or would constrict their creative talents and that they needed to move out of this relationship to carve out a distinct life for themselves. It was a risky step indeed but they had thrown caution to the winds and gone ahead. And leaving the married life despite angry protestations of their parents became the first step in their emancipation.

Once thus freed, they had devoted themselves with fierce determination to making a success of their career. Indeed many of them worked far harder than their male counterparts. Most of them were true workaholics, with one hand permanently glued to a blackberry. Having left prospect of a peaceful family life behind them, they all tended to substitute work for all the joys of domestic life. All of them worked tirelessly and at all hours to prove themselves. And all of them had.

With professional success had come economic independence as well. They all earned sizeable incomes and stock options. They owned the latest cars, dressed in the latest fashions and reveled in gourmet food and the latest wines. All now owned houses- one owned several and in different parts of the world. All took luxury vacations when they could tear themselves away from work, and had financial consultants to help them manage their increasing assets.

Physically they seemed to be in their prime glowing with the health that success inevitably brings. While face lifts and other lifts had yet to penetrate the Indian market except for the very rich, these women did spend considerable time at gyms or spas or with personal trainers to ensure that they remained in vigorous trim.

So here they were all these women who seemed to have everything—career success, economic independence, and physical freedom. What more could they want?

So I asked some of these high flying women “what do you lack in your life?”

One of them paused reflectively and replied in a pensive voice: “It is true that we have financial and professional security but what many of us lack is emotional support and security. “

Lacking a life partner, most of these women sought this emotional security and comfort in their families. All became were very close to their parents and siblings and spent an extraordinary amount of time with them. Some adopted a child and lavished their love and care on them. Others became god parents to their nieces and nephews and doted on them lavishing presents on them on all occasions.

But just as poverty brings problems, too much wealth too brings its own unique sets of problems as well. They find that a whole range of people becoming increasingly dependant on them. Family retainers often become family extortionists. Having achieved some considerable financial wealth and having no heirs to pass this onto, they often become, many times unwittingly, the expected generous aunts to their varied nephews and nieces. These in turn create new dilemmas for when the time comes to allocate their wealth, they do not know if they should treat them all equally or to play favorites, often causing rifts with their siblings.

Others still searched for their ideal soul mate even using the internet to find them. But even in this search, there was ambivalence. Did they really want a prince charming at this stage of their lives? Did they really want to give up their hard earned independence for emotional security?

“Would you consider marriage at this stage?”, I asked one of them.

“ No” she replied, “ one, it would be exceedingly difficult to find a soul mate at this stage of my life, and two, I may find one but if he becomes unwell – after all statistically men are more likely to die early or have terminal diseases—I will have to leave my career to tend to him and become his caregiver for the rest of my life. I am not sure that that would provide me with any emotional security at this stage of my life either. So, marriage no, but companionship, perhaps.”

“But what happens if you fall sick? Who will look after you and tend to you?”

This does give them pause. Being physically fit at this age, they find it difficult to imagine a time when they will encounter a serious illness or need hospitalization. It turns out, in the absence of any close family; they tend to rely on their close friends to fill this emotional need and help. It is no wonder that most of them have really close friends that they spend time with and whose friendships they nurture with considerable avidity.

And what about a lonely old age? Are they afraid of being left ignored in some corner while life passes by as they retire. Actually the reverse. In general it is women who are better able to deal with old age than men. Women find it easier to develop new hobbies- in most cases it is gourmet cooking or travel or art. Many move into volunteer activities and their lifetime of experience in the corporate world gives them considerable advantage over others. So instead of dreading life after retirement, these successful women often welcome the opportunity of using their remaining time in more useful ways.

These women are true pioneers of a new lifestyle as they continue solving the varied problems that their new life poses with considerable creativity and élan. As for that gift, a bunch of flowers perhaps?

Emerging new Indian artists

We have always wondered how we could find budding new artistes in any new field and follow their growth and trajectory towards greatness. In this short talk, Ravin Agarwal introduces us to 10 new young Indian artists. It is worth a look...

The first is Bharti Kher. The central motif of Bharti's practice is the ready-made store-bought bindi that untold millions of Indian women apply to their foreheads, every day, in an act closely associated with the institution of marriage. But originally the significance of the bindi is to symbolize the third eye between the spiritual world and the religious world. She says she first got started with 10 packets of bindis, and then wondered what she could do with 10 thousand.

Balasubramaniam, really stands at the crossroads of sculpture, painting and installation, working wonders with fiberglass.

Brooklyn-based Chitra Ganesh is known for her digital collages, using Indian comic books called amar chitra kathas as her primary source material.

Jitish Kallat successfully practices across photography, sculpture, painting and installation.

N.S. Harsha is putting a contemporary spin on the miniature tradition.

Dhruvi Acharya builds on her love of comic books and street art to comment on the roles and expectations of modern Indian women.

Rakib Shah too is reinventing the miniature tradition.

Raqs Media Collective are really three artists working together and are probably the foremost practitioners of multimedia art in India today, working across photography, video and installation.

Subodh Gupta celebrates local and mundane objects globally, and on a grander and grander scale, by incorporating them into ever more colossal sculptures and installations.

Ranjani Shettar creates ethereal sculptures and installations that really marry the organic to the industrial.

All in all new and exciting artistes to look forward to.

Yawning and sex

Just when you thought that scientific research could not get any weirder, comes this latest claim that yawing is an invitation to – yes, you guessed it-- sex! Of course, why we yawn has prompted speculation among scientists for a long time, but this latest research promises a new line of thinking altogether.

After all why do we yawn? Dogs do it, lions do it, and even babies in the womb do it – how come nobody really knows why. Of course, theories regarding why we yawn have been around for a while.

We open wide when we are tired, bored, or hungry. Some have suggested that a sudden drop in blood oxygen or a surge of carbon dioxide pumped out by a tired body, sparks it off but actual measurements do not bolster this claim.

It happens on hot days more than on cold, which leads to speculation that the action cools the brain. On the other hand, someone running a fever indulges in such acts less than normal.
Involuntary gaping peaks just before bed-time when we are tired but, oddly enough, disappears when we are lying, still awake, between the sheets. But it is also common just after we get up – when, presumably, we are not tired at all.
Yawning is catching, too, but as anyone who has sat through a lengthy boring movie can attest, so is laughter, vomiting, or (for men at least) having a pee if in company with other gents so occupied. A yawn, however, is more contagious than any of these. That may be a hint that the action evolved as a social cue – "time for us all to go to bed" – although as usual when evolution and human behavior meet, the tie is speculative at best.

However yawns arise, and whatever they signify, such a spontaneous copying response to a second person's signal of mood is an unmistakable sign of empathy; of an ability to understand and to react to someone else's state of mind. Empathy is what makes us into social and cooperative beings, and the speed and extent with which a person yawns in response to another's involuntary gape may be a quick and objective measure of to what degree he or she might be blessed with those useful talents.

Going beyond these speculations, perhaps it may be time to reflect that an open mouth may be more a sign of some impending change of state rather than a statement of tiredness itself; awake to asleep or vice versa. It may even be a general preparation for some new mental or physical experience. Certainly people expecting something novel to happen indulge in yawning quite frequently; parachutists about to jump tend do it, as did (allegedly) Neville Chamberlain in the moment when the disastrous failure of his Munich discussions with Hitler became clear and war seemed inevitable
As a result some scientists now are claiming to find a tie between sex and yawning, and not just as a "time for bed" hint. They point out that a really deep and lengthy gape is often accompanied by throwing out the chest and putting one's hands behind one's head. That, they suggest, is an erotic posture.

Until not long ago the evidence for any link between a yawn and sex was weak, but a paper at a recent meeting on sexual medicine reported a remarkable effect of a certain mood-altering drug given to women with depression. Several immediately went into uncontrollable bouts of yawning, accompanied by repeated orgasms over many hours.

But if you really want to find out the detailed research behind this claim, you will need to attend the International Congress of Chasmology which will take place in June, 2010 in Paris. The topic to be discussed at this conference is not diving but yawning. And of course, yawning and sex!

I dont know about you but I am not standing in line buying my air ticket for this conference.

A New Recipe for Aging Brains

I have been travelling recently – New Zealand, Goa, Delhi—and one of the interesting surprises has been the increasing emphasis that the old people are placing on their physical conditioning nowadays. Wherever I went, I saw old men – and women- out jogging in their jumpsuits, lugging bottles of water, and talking breathlessly of other physical pursuits they were pursuing or intended to pursue. Even in staid India, it was a shock to see old men in shorts—and not all of them belonged to the RSS- out for a stroll or a run early in the morning. In my own neighborhood, groups of men in shorts and the latest Nike shoes now often gathered in the nearby lawns for a brisk walk or “laughing therapy” and then long desultory gossip sessions.

It was clear that older people in India at least were paying a great deal more attention to their physical condition than their parents ever did. And this was also reflected in the statistics. The average life expectancy in India has gone up from 49 years in 1950 to 69 years in 2000.

What I was curious about was what they did to keep their minds similarly invigorated. I had noticed an increase of interest in crosswords and sudoko in my contemporaries. The new word among them was “a crossword a day keeps Alzheimer’s away”. But really besides the obligatory morning crossword session in the bathroom, what else could one do to keep the aging brain muscles alive and well, if not bursting with creativity.

With age, it seems that most people accept a slowing down and lack of memory as a given and do little to stimulate its activities. Also brains in middle age also get more easily distracted. Start searching for your reading glasses to read a headline go answer the doorbell and — whoosh — not only do all thoughts of glasses search disappear but also why you were searching for them in the firs place. Indeed, aging brains, even in the middle years, very often falls into what’s called the default mode, during which the mind wanders off and begins daydreaming.

Given all this, the question arises, can an old brain learn, and then remember what it learns? Put another way; is this a brain that should be in school?

The latest research says that it is not necessary to give up and even an aging brain can be made to learn new things. While it’s tempting to focus on the flaws in older brains, that observation unfortunately overlooks how capable they’ve become. Over the past several years, scientists have looked deeper into how brains age and confirmed that they continue to develop through and beyond middle age. Many long held views, including the one that 40 percent of brain cells are lost in the aged, have been overturned. What is stuffed into your head may not have vanished but has simply been squirreled away in the folds of your neurons. And it is possible to find and to revive them.

Recently, researchers have found that the brain, as it traverses middle age, gets better at recognizing the central idea, the big picture. If kept in good shape, the brain can continue to build pathways that help its owner recognize patterns and, as a consequence, see significance and even solutions much faster than a young person can. The trick is finding ways to keep brain connections in good condition and to grow more of them.

“The brain is plastic and continues to change, not in getting bigger but allowing for greater complexity and deeper understanding,” says Kathleen Taylor, a professor at St. Mary’s College of California, who has studied ways to teach adults effectively. “As adults we may not always learn quite as fast, but we are set up for this next developmental step.”

It seems that one way to nudge neurons in the right direction in aging brains is to challenge the very assumptions they have worked so hard to accumulate while young. With a brain already full of well-connected pathways, adult learners should “jiggle their synapses a bit” by confronting thoughts that are contrary to their own. Continued brain development and a richer form of learning, according to these researchers, require that you “bump up against people and ideas” that are different. If you always hang around with those you agree with and read things that agree with what you already know, you’re not going to wrestle with your established brain connections. It is such stretching that will best keep a brain in tune: get out of the comfort zone to push and nourish your brain. Do anything from learning a foreign language to taking a different route to work, from arguing with young people with different ideas to reading columnist you vehemently disagree with!

So there you have the latest scientific research telling you that the way to remain young in mind is to well become young in mind, questioning all that wisdom you have patiently accumulated over a lifetime and arguing once again with unformed and young minds! And just when you thought you had laid to rest all those pesky questions from your children, researchers are telling you to once again encourage them to question all your authority and hard earned sagacity if you want to remain young in mind and keep your brain muscles in trim.

Mothers and sons - part 2

Responses to my last blog on mother and son were interesting albeit a trifle predictable--after all few mothers of grown sons read blogs! Thus the emerging consensus of these replies was that the only solution was for the " apron strings to be cut" if there was ever to be a healthy relationship between mother, son and his wife. That, however, in many cases, is easier said than done.

Of course if the widowed mother lives some distance from the married son, the inherent tensions are usually muted.Then the only complaint from the mother to the son is " you never call me".

But if the widowed mother is compelled by choice or chance to live with her married son, the apron springs miraculously reappear bringing in its wake all the attendant tensions. She finds it hard to give up her role as the matriarch after a lifetime in that role while the wife seethes since she feels it is her role to be the head of the household. The mother thus alternates between acting as matriarch and becoming a "baglady"/nanny/cook subconsciously seeking to earn her keep. Sadly neither role fits and tensions keep bubbling under the surface. The only successful households that I have seen are where the widowed mother has taken to prayer and worship leaving the household to the daughter in law or where she develops a new life for herself as a worker in a charitable organization or with a new hobby. Then her role is clearly defined as the honored guest in the house and the font of wisdom and advice. However this is difficult to continue and often the old tensions reemerge that the hapless son is unable to mediate.

Paradoxically, it is the entry of another woman in this triangle- one whose writ runs large, who brooks no dissent and who increasingly has the ultimate decision on most matters -- that the issue usually gets resolved.It is no wonder that both wife and mother often repair to her to get him to do what needs to be done-- from " Dad, you are driving too fast" or "Dad, your cigars smell" or " why are you not taking my mother out on your anniversary". For what she says goes. And so many a dispute gets resolved and harmony returns to the household!!

The premature verdicts on Obama

With the end of the year, the US papers are filled with punditry pronouncing a range of negative verdicts on Obamas presidency. Some of this was clearly to be expected- it was unlikely that any republican, after the humiliation of 2008 defeat- would rise up to praise Obama. The bigger surprise is the virulence of commentators from the center and left and the almost supine acceptance of these dire- but dare i say completely erroneous verdicts-- by the supporters of Obama. Many of these supporters have withdrawn into a shell and there has been no attempt made to rally them with the truth except for rare attempts by Andrew Sullivan-- who is surprisingly a conservative commentator.

So here goes an effort to redress the balance and to urge a more objective view of what Obama has actually managed to achieve in 11 months of his presidency.

Let us look at the substantive record:

First,the foreign policy issues:

US announced its policy against torture

Gitmo is to be closed as soon as possible

The Cairo speech enunciated a new paradigm in US view of the muslim world that was welcomed around the world

The unitary executive, claiming vast, dictatorial powers over American citizens, has been unwound.

The legal inquiries that may well convict former Bush officials for war crimes are underway, and the trial of KSM will reveal the lawless sadism of the Cheney regime that did so much to sabotage the war on Jihadism.

Military force against al Qaeda in Pakistan has been ratcheted up considerably, even at a civilian cost that remains morally troubling.

There is a clear policy on Afghanistan where the US has given notice that it intends to leave Afghanistan with a big surge, a shift in tactics, and a heavy batch of new troops.

Orders have been issued for withdrawal from Iraq by end of 2010.

Relations with Russia have improved immensely and may yield real gains in non-proliferation;

Netanyahu has moved, however insincerely, toward a two-state solution;

Iran's coup regime remains far more vulnerable than a year ago, paralyzed in its diplomacy, terrified of its own people and constantly shaken by the ongoing revolution;

Pakistan launched a major offensive against al Qaeda and the Taliban in its border area;

global opinion of the US has been transformed

And at least the world finds Obamas approach meriting a Nobel Peace Prize despite domestic carping. the Cairo speech and the Nobel acceptance speech helped explain exactly what Obama's blend of ruthless realism for conflict-management truly means.

Domestically, the achievements have actually been even more impressive:

Obama's team has prevented the collapse of the US and the world economy- a fact that he has not been given enough credit for, in the hoopla of bail outs and bonuses

US economy has shifted from a tailspin to stablilization and some prospect of job growth next year;

the Dow is at 10,500 a level no one would have predicted this time last year when it had plunged to 6000 stunning many a retiree.

Major investments have been made in green technology laying the foundation for the future

The education spending and the ambitious agenda has flown under the radar of the beltway pundits,

The size of Peace Corps has been doubled, Pell grants increased substantially and a major filip given to Volunteerism

A stimulus package has helped undergird infrastructure and will probably do more to advance non-carbon energy than anything that might have emerged from Copenhagen.

Universal health insurance (with promised deficit reduction!) is imminent - a goal sought by Democrats (and Nixon) for decades.

And all this in just 11 months. Have all these tasks been completed? No. But they are a hell lot closer to achievement than many imagined just an year ago.

As Sullivan wisely notes " Change of this magnitude is extremely hard. That it is also frustrating, inadequate, compromised, flawed, and beset with bribes and trade-offs does not, in my mind, undermine it. Obama told us it would be like this - and it is. And those who backed him last year would do better, to my mind, if they appreciated the difficulty of this task and the diligence and civility that Obama has displayed in executing it."

It is time for all to realize the facts of these achievements and not allow the repubublican PR machine and the Fox networks to obscure these achievements. It is time for objective observers to acknowledge and admit that Obama's first year has done more than we thought possible, period.

The Good Samaritans Gift

Tis the season for giving. But sometimes it is easier to give than to receive, simpler to express sympathy than to accept it with grace,

I was reminded of this from an event in San Francisco. I was visiting with an old college friend, Tom Swift, and we were on our way to an early breakfast in Sausalito when we got off the highway ramp and were stuck at a red light. There was an old couple, relatively well dressed but standing mournfully at the lights with a cardboard sign seeking help. I gave it no thought till I saw Tom roll down his window and gesture to the woman who ran up to our car and to whom Tom handed over a few dollars. That seemed to start a chain reaction among the motorists at the light and pretty soon a few more cars owners beckoned the couple to give them a few dollars. As we rolled past the couple, I could see the man overcome with emotion with tears in his eyes while his wife cuddled up and kissed him, both their faces were awash with wonder and gratitude. He may have been cynical before but no more and her belief in the goodness of random strangers seemed justified. Receiving help and sympathy apparently is sometimes more difficult than the act of giving…

Yet there are different reactions to these acts of individual generosity. I have seen a beggar woman who has been around the World Bank building in Washington for the last twenty years. She has been at the same corner with the same sign “help me” and passerby’s often drop coins into her outstretched hands. She has not changed and indeed her reaction to the alms is curiously one of a sense of entitlement. People going to the bank are rich and she is poor and so the rich owe the poor.

Then there is the reaction of wonder and gratitude reflected in the face of that couple in San Francisco. These are most often people who have fallen unexpectedly on hard times, and as Tom explained, a prime cause has been the rising cost of healthcare.

Then there are still others who receive a gift when they are down and out but which stimulates in them a determination to give back to others when they prosper.

But what I really wanted to explore is the mind set of the receiver of gifts. It is easy to understand what drives the Good Samaritan, but what about the beneficiary of these gifts?

A great many cultures deliver variations of the message that it's better to give than to receive. This identifies us as good people, selfless, and perhaps even self-sacrificing.
Thus, by being giving people we believe that we earn the approval of others and avoid being the recipients of their disapproval. The self-esteem issue is often closely entwined with the nature of a giver. Often we may unconsciously believe that we don't deserve to receive. As long as we are giving we don't have to deal with the issue of what we deserve to receive.

Of course it is easy to give. After all then people thank us for our kindness and generosity, and we get to view ourselves as good people. Being kind and generous also gives us power. We have the ability to effect change and improvement in the lives of others. A related benefit is that we get to avoid feeling vulnerable. To me, this was initially the least obvious benefit of not receiving, so I suspect that it might be the most powerful one.

But it is in receiving that you discovery the challenge of who you are. For we have been given the message while growing up is that the appropriate response to a compliment is modesty to the point of humility. Ideally, we imply that we have never given a thought to the possibility that we have even a minor talent or gift. Some of us may have been even conditioned to the point where we believe that even to contemplate receiving in any form marks us as selfish and self-centered.

Giving spontaneously, without the need to bolster low self-esteem, to create a favorable appearance, to control relationships, or to protect oneself from vulnerability is the really true act of generosity. When it is practiced in a way which is designed to protect our fixed ideas of who we are it bears little relationship to generosity. Similarly when we refuse the generosity of others, our energy is tied up in resistance, in the attempt to preserve our emotional/mental status quo. We find, as well, that our attempts to genuinely love and nurture ourselves feel like a struggle. And it should not for gratitude is the most exquisite form of courtesy.

“Perhaps the most overrated virtue on our list of shoddy virtues is that of giving” writes John Steinbeck, “Giving builds up the ego of the giver, makes him superior and higher and larger than the receiver……. it is so easy to give, so exquisitely rewarding. Receiving, on the other hand, if it be well done, requires a fine balance of self-knowledge and kindness. It requires humility and tact and great understanding of relationships. In receiving you cannot appear, even to yourself, better or stronger or wiser than the giver, although you must be wiser to do it well”.

So in this holiday season, give a thought to the receiver of your gifts.

Mothers and sons

In a strange, faraway country, each boy believes that his mother is a virgin,
and each mother believes that her son is God.

In many eastern cultures, a woman is expected to depend on her father till she is married, her husband till she is a widow and her son till she dies. This dependence has a price. But the most interesting of these relationships is the one between a mother and her son.

Teenage behavior helps parents to cut themselves loose from their children: as your children love you less, they, rather helpfully, become less lovely. But not for mothers. They continue to believe that their son is a work in progress and is well on its way to perfection just give her enough time! She wants her son to find the right girl- usually one who closely resembles her and settle down. From his birth, her son is her major lifetime project. However, when it does happen, and another woman displaces her in her sons life, she feels adrift and with no major project in mind.

All mothers feel the pain of no longer being needed, but wont admit to it. They may passionately want their son to find the right woman, but when it happens, the mother often feels that she is cast aside. Perhaps it does all come down to Oedipus after all: the mother-son relationship is a deep and intense one during childhood, but, unlike the mother-daughter bond, a specific rupture has to be made before the child can be fully adult.

Thus the most delicate aspect of mother and son relationship comes, when another woman enters into his life, either as a girlfriend or as a wife. This is the time, when almost every mother starts feeling insecure and becomes apprehensive. From being the only woman in her son's life, she has to share the affection with someone, who is as important in her son's life as she is.

There is an irony in all this, of course. That the pressure to disavow our mothers might come not from fellow men, but from women – the very women who are theoretically sizing us up as the person who might, ultimately, turn them into a mother – is curious to say the least. Are men, perhaps, merely the intermediaries in an intergenerational rivalry between women?

A mother and son relationship is a very unique one. Boys generally look up to their fathers or a father-figure for how to interact with others, show affection towards others, and respond to different situations. But the mother, on the other hand, has a chance to show her son how a girl wants to be treated and how he should expect to be treated by the opposite sex. But men don’t look cool talking about their mothers since other women – with good reason – run a mile from a man who loves his mother too much. However wonderful and adorable a man’s mother is, the slightest mention of this fact makes him look as if he has not quite grown up and, therefore, is deeply unattractive. . A woman who reveres her parents will make a different impression. Daddy’s girl has a better connotation than a Mama’s boy. Does it not?

It is not easy for the son to make his mother understand that she has and will always be the most special person in his life but that now that there is another woman in his life. While this new person- his wife- can never take her place, there is a change. On the other hand, a mother should also understand that she has to stop holding on to her son all the time and let go of him. If he is not careful, he can sometimes end up living with two mothers- his wife and his mother. One does not want to be his mother, the other refuses to let him be any thing else but her son. Therein lies his dilemma. Whom should he please?

The death of shame

Webster's New World College Dictionary defines shame as a painful feeling of having lost the respect of others because of the improper behavior, incompetence, etc. of oneself or another; or as a dishonor or disgrace. People have been complaining about other people’s manners since the beginning of civilization and yet rude and immoral people have still somehow managed to flourish everywhere.

Recently ND Tiwari , governor of Andhra Pradesh and once considered as a potential prime minister of India, was caught in bed with three women – not one, not two but three. When caught he denied it and then complained that it was the result of opposition traps. There was neither an admission of guilt nor a hint of shame.. Fortunately, the body politic was suitably outraged that he was removed without delay.

These incidents of public servants have become all too common place and only rarely do they lead to a public humiliation or some degree of effective outrage.

It is true that in 2008, when the New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer was caught fooling around on his wife with a high-priced escort named Ashley Dupre, he did resign. But his replacement, David Paterson, who admitted to numerous affairs -- as well as marijuana and cocaine use – was sworn in as a governor of the largest state in the US shortly thereafter. Another governor, Mark Sanford of South Caroline, who was caught in an extramarital affair, rather than resign with whatever shred of dignity he had left, brazenly addressed the entire nation in a bizarre news conference that involved tears, true confessions, and apologies to nearly everyone he ever met. But he opted to remain as governor.. Not to be outdone, senators like Vitter and Ensign even when caught in dalliances, brazenly refused to resign and the press, true to its short term memory, gave them a pass and they still routinely opine on all matters moral and immoral. Not only that like Britney Spears, Paris Hilton, and Lindsay Lohan, these public figures have become richer from behaving like tramps.

Even outside the steamy world of celebrity sex-capades, shame has become an outmoded concept. No longer is there any shame in staying on welfare or having a child out of wedlock. There is no shame in being just a mediocre student in school. Elbows on the dinner table and interrupting are accepted. We can talk and text in the movies -- and screaming at someone in public is OK. We put up with crude, even filthy, language on the radio, in music, and more and more on television. Four letter words and worse, is heard everywhere, every day. Coarse behavior is considered acceptable with people shouting “liar” at the president within the house. Senators, who should know better, routinely decry the opposition party members as traitors and some even wish that they would die before casting a vote!

We teach our kids that self-esteem is something entitled simply because one exists. We tell children that they are all great kids and they deserve to be appreciated just the way they are. Perhaps a little old-fashioned shame could serve us well. This is not to advocate a return to the harsh judgments of yesteryear. No one wants to see someone tarred and feathered for making poor choices or behaving badly -- but perhaps just a wee touch of accountability could have some positive effects.

The sense of shame is a kind of cement in any decent society. The fear of shame reminds each of us that some things must not be done. You don't become a criminal because you would bring shame to your family. You don't employ muscle against the weak. You don't beat up women or prey on the old. You don't father children and then abandon them. You don't cheat or swindle because exposure would coat you with the tar of shame. You don't preach high ideals and live a lie. But it's clear that we are now awash in shamelessness. It's clear that the sense of shame needs to be revived and the shameless held to account.

It is time to start being judgmental and critical of actions that are considered immoral or wrong by society. What's wrong with shaking one's head or uttering a well-placed, "tsk, tsk," or even telling someone you don't want to hear bad language? What is to prevent the press from giving publicity to these hacks and ill-mannered boors? I, for one, would be very happy if the Washington Post would stop writing series on idiots like Salahis or Tom Coburns. Good riddance, I say, to all of them. Take your filth and meanness somewhere else and not on national TV or papers—just take them away.

For as Salman Rushdie points out “shame is like everything else; live with it for long enough and it becomes part of the furniture.”

Obama's Nobel Lecture

This is a lecture worth studying

I receive this honor with deep gratitude and great humility. It is an award that speaks to our highest aspirations -- that for all the cruelty and hardship of our world, we are not mere prisoners of fate. Our actions matter, and can bend history in the direction of justice.

And yet I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the considerable controversy that your generous decision has generated. In part, this is because I am at the beginning, and not the end, of my labors on the world stage. Compared to some of the giants of history who have received this prize -- Schweitzer and King; Marshall and Mandela -- my accomplishments are slight. And then there are the men and women around the world who have been jailed and beaten in the pursuit of justice; those who toil in humanitarian organizations to relieve suffering; the unrecognized millions whose quiet acts of courage and compassion inspire even the most hardened of cynics. I cannot argue with those who find these men and women -- some known, some obscure to all but those they help -- to be far more deserving of this honor than I.

But perhaps the most profound issue surrounding my receipt of this prize is the fact that I am the Commander-in-Chief of a nation in the midst of two wars. One of these wars is winding down. The other is a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43 other countries -- including Norway -- in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks.

Still, we are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed. And so I come here with an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict -- filled with difficult questions about the relationship between war and peace, and our effort to replace one with the other.

These questions are not new. War, in one form or another, appeared with the first man. At the dawn of history, its morality was not questioned; it was simply a fact, like drought or disease -- the manner in which tribes and then civilizations sought power and settled their differences.

Over time, as codes of law sought to control violence within groups, so did philosophers, clerics and statesmen seek to regulate the destructive power of war. The concept of a "just war" emerged, suggesting that war is justified only when it meets certain preconditions: if it is waged as a last resort or in self-defense; if the forced used is proportional; and if, whenever possible, civilians are spared from violence.

For most of history, this concept of just war was rarely observed. The capacity of human beings to think up new ways to kill one another proved inexhaustible, as did our capacity to exempt from mercy those who look different or pray to a different God. Wars between armies gave way to wars between nations -- total wars in which the distinction between combatant and civilian became blurred. In the span of 30 years, such carnage would twice engulf this continent. And while it is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers, World War II was a conflict in which the total number of civilians who died exceeded the number of soldiers who perished.

In the wake of such destruction, and with the advent of the nuclear age, it became clear to victor and vanquished alike that the world needed institutions to prevent another World War. And so, a quarter century after the United States Senate rejected the League of Nations -- an idea for which Woodrow Wilson received this Prize -- America led the world in constructing an architecture to keep the peace: a Marshall Plan and a United Nations, mechanisms to govern the waging of war, treaties to protect human rights, prevent genocide and restrict the most dangerous weapons.
In many ways, these efforts succeeded. Yes, terrible wars have been fought, and atrocities committed. But there has been no Third World War. The Cold War ended with jubilant crowds dismantling a wall. Commerce has stitched much of the world together. Billions have been lifted from poverty. The ideals of liberty, self-determination, equality and the rule of law have haltingly advanced. We are the heirs of the fortitude and foresight of generations past, and it is a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud.

A decade into a new century, this old architecture is buckling under the weight of new threats. The world may no longer shudder at the prospect of war between two nuclear superpowers, but proliferation may increase the risk of catastrophe. Terrorism has long been a tactic, but modern technology allows a few small men with outsized rage to murder innocents on a horrific scale.

Moreover, wars between nations have increasingly given way to wars within nations. The resurgence of ethnic or sectarian conflicts, the growth of secessionist movements, insurgencies and failed states have increasingly trapped civilians in unending chaos. In todays wars, many more civilians are killed than soldiers; the seeds of future conflict are sown, economies are wrecked, civil societies torn asunder, refugees amassed and children scarred.

I do not bring with me today a definitive solution to the problems of war. What I do know is that meeting these challenges will require the same vision, hard work and persistence of those men and women who acted so boldly decades ago. And it will require us to think in new ways about the notions of just war and the imperatives of a just peace.

We must begin by acknowledging the hard truth that we will not eradicate violent conflict in our lifetimes. There will be times when nations -- acting individually or in concert -- will find the use of force not only necessary but morally justified.
I make this statement mindful of what Martin Luther King said in this same ceremony years ago: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates new and more complicated ones." As someone who stands here as a direct consequence of Dr. Kings lifes work, I am living testimony to the moral force of non-violence. I know there is nothing weak, nothing passive, nothing naive in the creed and lives of Gandhi and King.

But as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation, I cannot be guided by their examples alone. I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people. For make no mistake: Evil does exist in the world. A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitlers armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaidas leaders to lay down their arms. To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism -- it is a recognition of history, the imperfections of man and the limits of reason.

I raise this point because in many countries there is a deep ambivalence about military action today, no matter the cause. At times, this is joined by a reflexive suspicion of America, the world’s sole military superpower.

Yet the world must remember that it was not simply international institutions _ not just treaties and declarations -- that brought stability to a post-World War II world. Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms. The service and sacrifice of our men and women in uniform has promoted peace and prosperity from Germany to Korea, and enabled democracy to take hold in places like the Balkans. We have borne this burden not because we seek to impose our will. We have done so out of enlightened self-interest -- because we seek a better future for our children and grandchildren, and we believe that their lives will be better if other people's children and grandchildren can live in freedom and prosperity.

So yes, the instruments of war do have a role to play in preserving the peace. And yet this truth must coexist with another -- that no matter how justified, war promises human tragedy. The soldier’s courage and sacrifice is full of glory, expressing devotion to country, to cause and to comrades in arms. But war itself is never glorious, and we must never trumpet it as such.

So part of our challenge is reconciling these two seemingly irreconcilable truths -- that war is sometimes necessary, and war is at some level an expression of human folly. Concretely, we must direct our effort to the task that President Kennedy called for long ago. "Let us focus," he said, "on a more practical, more attainable peace, based not on a sudden revolution in human nature but on a gradual evolution in human institutions."

What might this evolution look like? What might these practical steps be?
To begin with, I believe that all nations -- strong and weak alike -- must adhere to standards that govern the use of force. I -- like any head of state -- reserve the right to act unilaterally if necessary to defend my nation. Nevertheless, I am convinced that adhering to standards strengthens those who do, and isolates -- and weakens -- those who dont.

The world rallied around America after the 9/11 attacks, and continues to support our efforts in Afghanistan, because of the horror of those senseless attacks and the recognized principle of self-defense. Likewise, the world recognized the need to confront Saddam Hussein when he invaded Kuwait -- a consensus that sent a clear message to all about the cost of aggression.

Furthermore, America cannot insist that others follow the rules of the road if we refuse to follow them ourselves. For when we dont, our action can appear arbitrary, and undercut the legitimacy of future intervention -- no matter how justified.
This becomes particularly important when the purpose of military action extends beyond self-defense or the defense of one nation against an aggressor. More and more, we all confront difficult questions about how to prevent the slaughter of civilians by their own government, or to stop a civil war whose violence and suffering can engulf an entire region.

I believe that force can be justified on humanitarian grounds, as it was in the Balkans, or in other places that have been scarred by war. Inaction tears at our conscience and can lead to more costly intervention later. That is why all responsible nations must embrace the role that militaries with a clear mandate can play to keep the peace.

Americas commitment to global security will never waver. But in a world in which threats are more diffuse, and missions more complex, America cannot act alone. This is true in Afghanistan. This is true in failed states like Somalia, where terrorism and piracy is joined by famine and human suffering. And sadly, it will continue to be true in unstable regions for years to come.

The leaders and soldiers of NATO countries -- and other friends and allies -- demonstrate this truth through the capacity and courage they have shown in Afghanistan. But in many countries, there is a disconnect between the efforts of those who serve and the ambivalence of the broader public. I understand why war is not popular. But I also know this: The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it. Peace requires responsibility. Peace entails sacrifice. That is why NATO continues to be indispensable. That is why we must strengthen U.N. and regional peacekeeping, and not leave the task to a few countries. That is why we honor those who return home from peacekeeping and training abroad to Oslo and Rome; to Ottawa and Sydney; to Dhaka and Kigali -- we honor them not as makers of war, but as wagers of peace.

Let me make one final point about the use of force. Even as we make difficult decisions about going to war, we must also think clearly about how we fight it. The Nobel Committee recognized this truth in awarding its first prize for peace to Henry Dunant -- the founder of the Red Cross, and a driving force behind the Geneva Conventions.

Where force is necessary, we have a moral and strategic interest in binding ourselves to certain rules of conduct. And even as we confront a vicious adversary that abides by no rules, I believe that the United States of America must remain a standard bearer in the conduct of war. That is what makes us different from those whom we fight. That is a source of our strength. That is why I prohibited torture. That is why I ordered the prison at Guantanamo Bay closed. And that is why I have reaffirmed Americas commitment to abide by the Geneva Conventions. We lose ourselves when we compromise the very ideals that we fight to defend. And we honor those ideals by upholding them not just when it is easy, but when it is hard.
I have spoken to the questions that must weigh on our minds and our hearts as we choose to wage war. But let me turn now to our effort to avoid such tragic choices, and speak of three ways that we can build a just and lasting peace.
First, in dealing with those nations that break rules and laws, I believe that we must develop alternatives to violence that are tough enough to change behavior -- for if we want a lasting peace, then the words of the international community must mean something. Those regimes that break the rules must be held accountable. Sanctions must exact a real price. Intransigence must be met with increased pressure -- and such pressure exists only when the world stands together as one.
One urgent example is the effort to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons, and to seek a world without them. In the middle of the last century, nations agreed to be bound by a treaty whose bargain is clear: All will have access to peaceful nuclear power; those without nuclear weapons will forsake them; and those with nuclear weapons will work toward disarmament. I am committed to upholding this treaty. It is a centerpiece of my foreign policy. And I am working with President Medvedev to reduce America and Russias nuclear stockpiles.

But it is also incumbent upon all of us to insist that nations like Iran and North Korea do not game the system. Those who claim to respect international law cannot avert their eyes when those laws are flouted. Those who care for their own security cannot ignore the danger of an arms race in the Middle East or East Asia. Those who seek peace cannot stand idly by as nations arm themselves for nuclear war.
The same principle applies to those who violate international law by brutalizing their own people. When there is genocide in Darfur, systematic rape in Congo or repression in Burma -- there must be consequences. And the closer we stand together, the less likely we will be faced with the choice between armed intervention and complicity in oppression.

This brings me to a second point -- the nature of the peace that we seek. For peace is not merely the absence of visible conflict. Only a just peace based upon the inherent rights and dignity of every individual can truly be lasting.
It was this insight that drove drafters of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights after the Second World War. In the wake of devastation, they recognized that if human rights are not protected, peace is a hollow promise.

And yet all too often, these words are ignored. In some countries, the failure to uphold human rights is excused by the false suggestion that these are Western principles, foreign to local cultures or stages of a nation’s development. And within America, there has long been a tension between those who describe themselves as realists or idealists -- a tension that suggests a stark choice between the narrow pursuit of interests or an endless campaign to impose our values.
I reject this choice. I believe that peace is unstable where citizens are denied the right to speak freely or worship as they please, choose their own leaders or assemble without fear. Pent up grievances fester, and the suppression of tribal and religious identity can lead to violence. We also know that the opposite is true. Only when Europe became free did it finally find peace. America has never fought a war against a democracy, and our closest friends are governments that protect the rights of their citizens. No matter how callously defined, neither America’s interests -- nor the worlds -- are served by the denial of human aspirations.
So even as we respect the unique culture and traditions of different countries, America will always be a voice for those aspirations that are universal. We will bear witness to the quiet dignity of reformers like Aung Sang Suu Kyi; to the bravery of Zimbabweans who cast their ballots in the face of beatings; to the hundreds of thousands who have marched silently through the streets of Iran. It is telling that the leaders of these governments fear the aspirations of their own people more than the power of any other nation. And it is the responsibility of all free people and free nations to make clear to these movements that hope and history are on their side.

Let me also say this: The promotion of human rights cannot be about exhortation alone. At times, it must be coupled with painstaking diplomacy. I know that engagement with repressive regimes lacks the satisfying purity of indignation. But I also know that sanctions without outreach -- and condemnation without discussion -- can carry forward a crippling status quo. No repressive regime can move down a new path unless it has the choice of an open door.

In light of the Cultural Revolutions horrors, Nixon’s meeting with Mao appeared inexcusable -- and yet it surely helped set China on a path where millions of its citizens have been lifted from poverty, and connected to open societies. Pope John Pauls engagement with Poland created space not just for the Catholic Church, but for labor leaders like Lech Walesa. Ronald Reagan’s efforts on arms control and embrace of perestroika not only improved relations with the Soviet Union, but empowered dissidents throughout Eastern Europe. There is no simple formula here. But we must try as best we can to balance isolation and engagement, pressure and incentives, so that human rights and dignity are advanced over time.

Third, a just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity. For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want.

It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine they need to survive. It does not exist where children cannot aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family. The absence of hope can rot a society from within.

And that is why helping farmers feed their own people -- or nations educate their children and care for the sick -- is not mere charity. It is also why the world must come together to confront climate change. There is little scientific dispute that if we do nothing, we will face more drought, famine and mass displacement that will fuel more conflict for decades. For this reason, it is not merely scientists and activists who call for swift and forceful action -- it is military leaders in my country and others who understand that our common security hangs in the balance.
Agreements among nations. Strong institutions. Support for human rights. Investments in development. All of these are vital ingredients in bringing about the evolution that President Kennedy spoke about. And yet, I do not believe that we will have the will, or the staying power, to complete this work without something more -- and that is the continued expansion of our moral imagination, an insistence that there is something irreducible that we all share.

As the world grows smaller, you might think it would be easier for human beings to recognize how similar we are, to understand that we all basically want the same things, that we all hope for the chance to live out our lives with some measure of happiness and fulfillment for ourselves and our families.

And yet, given the dizzying pace of globalization, and the cultural leveling of modernity, it should come as no surprise that people fear the loss of what they cherish about their particular identities -- their race, their tribe and, perhaps most powerfully, their religion. In some places, this fear has led to conflict. At times, it even feels like we are moving backwards. We see it in the Middle East, as the conflict between Arabs and Jews seems to harden. We see it in nations that are torn asunder by tribal lines.

Most dangerously, we see it in the way that religion is used to justify the murder of innocents by those who have distorted and defiled the great religion of Islam, and who attacked my country from Afghanistan. These extremists are not the first to kill in the name of God; the cruelties of the Crusades are amply recorded. But they remind us that no Holy War can ever be a just war. For if you truly believe that you are carrying out divine will, then there is no need for restraint -- no need to spare the pregnant mother, or the medic, or even a person of ones own faith. Such a warped view of religion is not just incompatible with the concept of peace, but the purpose of faith -- for the one rule that lies at the heart of every major religion is that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us.

Adhering to this law of love has always been the core struggle of human nature. We are fallible. We make mistakes, and fall victim to the temptations of pride, and power, and sometimes evil. Even those of us with the best intentions will at times fail to right the wrongs before us.

But we do not have to think that human nature is perfect for us to still believe that the human condition can be perfected. We do not have to live in an idealized world to still reach for those ideals that will make it a better place. The nonviolence practiced by men like Gandhi and King may not have been practical or possible in every circumstance, but the love that they preached -- their faith in human progress -- must always be the North Star that guides us on our journey.
For if we lose that faith -- if we dismiss it as silly or naive, if we divorce it from the decisions that we make on issues of war and peace -- then we lose what is best about humanity. We lose our sense of possibility. We lose our moral compass.
Like generations have before us, we must reject that future. As Dr. King said at this occasion so many years ago: "I refuse to accept despair as the final response to the ambiguities of history. I refuse to accept the idea that the "isness" of mans present nature makes him morally incapable of reaching up for the eternal "oughtness" that forever confronts him."

So let us reach for the world that ought to be -- that spark of the divine that still stirs within each of our souls. Somewhere today, in the here and now, a soldier sees hes outgunned but stands firm to keep the peace. Somewhere today, in this world, a young protestor awaits the brutality of her government, but has the courage to march on. Somewhere today, a mother facing punishing poverty still takes the time to teach her child, who believes that a cruel world still has a place for his dreams.

Let us live by their example. We can acknowledge that oppression will always be with us, and still strive for justice. We can admit the intractability of deprivation, and still strive for dignity. We can understand that there will be war, and still strive for peace. We can do that -- for that is the story of human progress; that is the hope of all the world; and at this moment of challenge, that must be our work here on Earth.

The strangest of tastes - Part II

I had just finished the piece of marmite, when my attention was drawn to another product which draws an equally fanatic following.. on either side. Durian.

Opponents of this food product say that eating durian is "like eating sweet raspberry blancmange in the lavatory novelist ( British novelist, Anthony Burgess). Chef Andrew Zimmern compares the taste to "completely rotten, mushy onions." Anthony Bourdain, while a lover of durian, relates his encounter with the fruit as thus: "Its taste can only be described as...indescribable, something you will either love or despise. ...Your breath will smell as if you'd been French-kissing your dead grandmother." Travel and food writer Richard Sterling says: ... its odor is best described as pig-shit, turpentine and onions, garnished with a gym sock. It can be smelled from yards away. Other comparisons have been made with the civet, sewage, stale vomit, skunk spray and used surgical swabs.

One would imagine that with such testimonials, the devotees of this fruit would be chastened. Not so. Indeed lovers of the fruit call it the “King of the Fruits".The Javanese believe durian to have aphrodisiac qualities. A saying in Indonesian says “durian jatuh sarung naik” which loosely translated means that when "the durians fall ..the sarongs come up".

Durian is an expensive and exotic fruit from Asia and its name is derived from the Malay word "duri" meaning thorn - due to its thick, tough and thorny husk. The durian fruit is either loved by durian aficionados with an almost cult like fervor or hated by those repelled by its smell. The rich, buttery smooth and luscious flesh of the durian fruit is delicious and is comparable to no other fruit. However, the disagreeable odor of the durian fruit gave birth to this often repeated phrase: "durian is a fruit that smells like hell but taste like heaven".
It is said that you should

• Never burp after devouring on a Durian. The consequences are ghastly!
• Never combine Durian with carbonated drinks. This choice will leave you sorry!
• Never leave the Durian in the car on a hot summer's day or even in a hotel room. The stench will take the wind out of your sails.
• Never kiss your better half after consuming a Durian. You will end up on your rear or even a break-up.
• Never leave Durian uncovered in the fridge. Or else, the entire stuff in the fridge will smell like Durian and you will have only smelly food for dinner.

Indeed its odor has led to the fruit's banishment from certain hotels and public transportation in Southeast Asia. At least marmite is not banned anywhere that I know of!

A Very Indian Wedding ..in the US

Indian mythology says that there are eight different types of Hindu marriages. But as Indians have emigrated to different countries, particularly in the last fifty years, new traditions are emerging which struggle to blend tradition with modernity in marriage customs.

The most common form was the Brahma marriage, where a boy is eligible to get married once he has completed his Brahmacharya (student hood) and where the grooms family seeks out a suitable bride for their son. Then there is the Gandharva marriage, which is similar to love marriage, since it is without the knowledge of the parents. There are other marriages such as Daiva, where the bride is married to a priest, Arsha where the bride is given in exchange for two cows and married to an old sage, Prajapatya where the bride’s father goes in search for a groom for his daughter. In the Asura marriage, the groom is not suitable for the bride but willingly gives as much wealth as he can to cement the marriage. And there is the Rakshasa marriage where the groom fights battles with the bride's family, overcomes them, carries her away and then persuades her to marry him. Paishacha marriage is the eighth and last type of Hindu wedding but it is considered as the inferior type of marriage, since the girl's wish is not considered and she is forced to marry the person chosen for her. In Hindu dharma, marriage is viewed as a sacrament and not a contract and is performed in Sanskrit.

The traditional Indian wedding customs were formulated more than 35 centuries ago. Each ceremony, each occasion, and each ritual thus had a deep philosophical meaning and purpose. In the early days in the US, there were, however, no Brahmins around since most of the immigrants tended to be engineers or doctors. So a detailed checklist was issued by Indian associations for those wishing to get married here explaining the various customs, which read, in part: “The auspicious wedding day begins with the Mangal Vadya, the playing of the Shahenai, a traditional reed flute- like wind instrument of Indian Classical Music, and the Noubat, the small drums. The groom arrives with his family and friends at the entrance to the wedding hall and is first greeted by a young maiden, the bride's younger sister or niece, holding a water pot to quench his thirst. Next, the bride's mother welcomes the groom performing a ceremony to ward off the evil spirits he may have encountered on the way to the wedding. He is then asked to break the Saapath (the earthen clay pot) symbolizing his strength and virility and is then led to the Lagna Mandap where the wedding ceremony is to be performed.”

“The bride is brought to the Lagna Mandap by her Mama (maternal uncle) and is seated behind a white curtain, a symbol of traditional barriers. After the bride's father thanks the Gods, the curtain is removed and the couple exchange flower garlands. The bride and the bridegroom exchange garlands, made up of cotton threads, to proclaim acceptance of each other. The wedding ceremony begins with the worship of Lord Ganesha, the remover of all obstacles and Varuna, Lord of the Seas. A copper vessel containing water, flowers, and coconut is worshipped followed by the worship of the five basic elements of creation, namely fire, earth, water, air, and light. The bride's parents invoke the Gods and tell the groom, "On this Holy Occasion, we will give our daughter who is a symbol of Lakshmi, Goddess of Prosperity, to you in the presence of the Sacred Fire, friends, and relatives." The couple is then united by placing the bride's right hand in the groom's right hand. The ends of the scarves worn by the bride and the groom are then tied together signifying unity. The couple vows to remember the Divine; to look upon others with sympathy, love, and compassion; to be strong and righteous; and to show goodwill, respect, and affection to each other's families. The marriage is solemnized before the Lord Agni (the Sacred Fire) who is the symbol of light, power, and purity and acts as the principal witness to the ceremony. The invocations and offerings are also made to Lords of the nine planets to remove all obstacles and bless the bride and the groom. The bride and the groom circle the fire four times. The groom leads the bride in the first three rounds. The bride, representing Shakti, the Divine Energy, leads in the last round. At the end of each round the bride's brother or cousin gives offerings for the Sacred Fire. The first three represent the material wealth of cows, silver, and gold. The last one represents the gift of the bride herself to her new family. At the end of the ceremony, the bride stands to the groom's left, where she has taken a place closest to his heart. The groom offers Mangal Sutra (a sacred necklace made of black beads) to his wife and places Sindoor (a red powder) on her forehead. Both signify the mark of a married woman and symbols of his love, integrity, and devotion towards her.”

“The bride and groom take seven steps around or toward the sacred fire representing the seven principles and promises to each other:
1. Together, we will acquire energy to share in the responsibilities of married life.
2. Together, we will fill our hearts with strength and courage to accomplish all the needs of our life.
3. Together, we will prosper and share our worldly goods and we will work for the prosperity of our family.
4. Together, we will cherish each other in sickness and in health; in happiness and in sorrow.
5. Together, we will raise strong and virtuous children.
6. Together, we will fill our hearts with great joy, peace, happiness, and spiritual values, and
7. Together, we will remain lifelong partners by this matrimony.

With the Saptapadi—the taking of seven steps by the bridegroom and the bride jointly before the sacred fire- the marriage becomes complete and binding when the seventh step is taken. The bride and groom are now united and seek blessings from Lord Vishnu the Preserver and his consort Lakshmi, The Goddess of Wealth. The couple then seeks blessings from the Gods, parents, and elderly relatives by bowing to their feet. Married women from the family bless the bride by whispering "Akhanda Saubhagyawati Bhav" (blessing for abiding marital happiness) in the bride's right ear. The last ritual of the ceremony is where the bride begins an important role in her life as a wife and a member of the groom's family. She throws a handful of rice so that the house of her childhood remains prosperous and happy. The bride and bridegroom then retire to a bedroom suitably decorated with flowers and outside their room, a glass full of almond laced milk is placed as stimulant for the rigors of the wedding night.”

Prior to the Hindu Code Bill in 1953, there were no restrictions on polygamy, child brides or on dowry. Now however, the Indian penal code prescribes severe punishment for such acts. In fact the immigrant Indians, newly rich, in the US sometimes seek to kindle their connections with their old traditions by reverting back to some of these antediluvian, and illegal customs. So dowry in a disguised form has emerged in the form of requests for cars and houses from the family of the bridegroom. Rituals are extended over three to five days in a bid to outdo the neighbors. Sometimes this means that modernity is going backward. Fortunately the families reverting to the old are few and what is emerging is a hybrid mix of the old and the new which is fascinating.

Over the past few years, internet has replaced the old methods of finding a spouse. Portals like e-harmony.com provide opportunities for young Indians to look for a suitable mate. The Indian portals like shadi.com, however, still provide for parents to do the short listing of candidates!

In ancient times, the bridegroom never saw the bride till the wedding day. But now he goes to the parents of the bride to formally seek their permission to propose. He then takes his bride to a restaurant, kneels and proposes to her with a diamond ring along with a glass of champagne.

As in the past, the bride’s family traipses to the bridegroom’s house carrying gur and a gold coin along with sweets and presents. Sweets are often replaced with chocolates. These, called “shagun” are really meant to “reserve” the bridegroom for the bride. Once the bride’s mother has accepted these gifts, she is honor bound to continue on with the marriage.

The bridegroom used to come on a white horse to the bride’s house for the wedding. But now a white Mercedes-Benz does the trick.

The marriage is still solemnized under a lagna pandal but since now it may be within a hotel, the pandal is not constructed with banana plants but is instead a wooden frame draped with flowers. The sacred wooden fire is often replaced with gas lit flames due to fire restrictions within the hotel.

The bridegroom has to wear a dhoti but now there are ready made and tied dhotis that can be strapped on while the bride can wear jeans below her lovely sarees.

Gold retains its power as a gift but now a bridal registry is seen as a more practical alternative.

The best change however is the fact that the five days of festivities are now compressed into one day or the time the hotel will allow for a booking.

And as for that glass of milk outside the room. It is now champagne in an ice bucket in the room!