Tuesday, September 18, 2007

An attempt on Religion, Art and Abstraction

Secularism is an important understanding. This blogger is a great admirer of Indian understanding of secularism that is each religion is a way of understanding and reaching God. I am quite a skeptic of western secularism which tends to draw a line between faith and everything else, reducing religion to isolation or ridiculed into irrational or superstition. It is not at all surprising since in West religion has had history of atrocities on secular activities- the ‘dark ages’ wherein anything that contradicted the religion were prosecuted. Since religion in West did intrude/contradicted the secular, the rational, Renaissance (to some extend even Protestants) was a reaction, an outburst for individuality, an attempt to claim public space, assertion of freedom of expression. Secularism therefore was an attempt to keep religion away from public space. Further as a reaction it became acceptable to ridicule or lampoon religious symbols taken to extreme in the name of freedom of expression.

This idea or practice of secularism maybe acceptable in West since it follows their narration but to apply that to other societies is flawed. This alien understanding can be a cause of discontent. Of course there definitely are universal elements like on Truth as also criticizing inhuman practices, upholding sacredness of individual rights which can be trampled even by religion that has no reference point to west (followers of Hinduism did heinous crimes is on record but the religion as such was open to experimentation on ideas and thinking). The Western understanding of secularism does have some of the positives that need to be cherished.

Freedom of Expression defines civilized society. Every individual should have the right to explore life to his/her potential (here it needs to be pointed out that every individual is creative in their own way and that creativity is not confined to certain occupations, to get precedence). Any hindrance to this is curtailing of human rights. However since we live in society it has to work in context, there is a need to strike balance particularly when it is the question of faith. All faith (crystallized as Religion) works at two level: One is symbols that are holy scriptures, places of worships, images of god/holy figures and so on that are venerated. Second is the level that transcends these, spiritual- to put it in words, where one understands meanings beyond these symbols, have an enlightened encompassing faith and so world view. The intention of all religions and great saints is to take humans to this level of understanding. It is a path, it is a process that is very individual. Even in collective participation the change has to be from within.

However despite these egalitarian intentions of Religion most people find it difficult to take the path, it maybe due to various factors most prominent being getting into the rut of occupations to survive. Therefore except minuscule percentage of people most very strongly associate with symbols and therefore cause of strife if stifled with. Taking the specific instance of painters (artists who seems to have monopoly over creativity!!) since they have been in controversy in recent times it need be stressed that an evolved artist will have an empathic understanding of predicaments of people vis a vis faith. Therefore he/she will respect the images that are revered by common people. Further if the intention is to explore ideas, truth and so on then an evolved artist (necessarily an evolved individual) will be subtle. It will be more abstract involvement. Contrast this with arrogance of our time and the attempt to teach ‘freedom for expression’. The world has become very complicated and artists (as also common people who are artists in their own way!!) needs to understand the context in which they function, it is not limitation but challenge.

What we see now is crasser version with specific aim to be controversial and benefits from spin off. We live in morass of the time with market force influence as also media. Catching the public space by whatever means has become an in all (most artists-painters I know at personal level were scoundrels to say the least, so the egalitarians versions of people associated with art is definitely not true nor are they progenies of renaissance). The media for their own reasons will not explore this but most people are very antagonistic about the way market has encroached into their life. So when it comes to Gods they revere it can go out of hand. As a reaction people have become quite vicious in their response which is manipulated by political party and media. Whatever maybe the reason for difference to call for killing someone for transgression is heinous and cause of worry. Hooligans are nobody to decide and should have no space in civilized world.

Coming to Hindu Gods/Goddesses the pictures have a context and stories (some local some mainstream) which most Hindus are aware of. So it is not open for anyone to work on, you are treading on serious repercussion here. Private involvement with God need remain private, the different depiction they are quoting was not meant for market consumption. There is a stampede going on to make private public, and seen as some kind of achievement, maybe but Gods or religious symbols are not private; it is shared by millions of people at a very intimate level. You are taking things out of context for market which will not be tolerated by most people. Also understand we are living in a world of TRPs and political parties so sometimes minor issue can get exploded. Who gets benefits from these controversies need be studied, secular fundamentalists cannot be ruled out.

If people are worked up too much in their arrogance they can very well start their own religion!!. But the symbols revered by millions of people cannot be vandalized, Danish cartoons are unacceptable. Art is subtler form of life. Freedom for expression is not a license for playing with faith and belief of common people and whatever little they have left to revere (one need to understand their insecurities and predicaments in life). This blogger request the Government to have stricter laws in matter of religious symbols/ holy texts of all religion like the one associated with nation state- flag and so on. Western narrations cannot work in this part of the world nor their understanding of secularism that some have got tutored having spent most time in that part of the world and now want to teach us, the arrogance is astounding. It is not about morality but contemporary need. It is not about freezing life but exploring its intricacies and challenges. Evolving is about abstraction and not borrowing images revered by millions as part of faith, soul. Maybe when everyone is enlightened then significance of symbols/God will be understood. Also maybe then there will be realization that life is more abstract; there is less to explore in religious symbols. People have much serious problems that need to be addressed. Mischief is win-win for certain section but for common people it is another burden they can do without.
Post script: I came across these lines in The Kite RunnerWhen you tell a lie, you steal someone’s right to truth. When you cheat, you steal the right to fairness’. How could anyone ever miss a book that has such incredible lines?

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Why we should read ‘The Islamist’, and some personal recollections

The Islamist’ is a path breaking book in many ways. It is one of those rare books that have become generic reference to Islamic fundamentalism: Islamist is now a reference to far right in Islam. ‘The Islamist’ is a candid insight into contemporary mindset that breeds fundamentalism, in specific reference to follies of Britain that unfortunately impacts the world- more to this subcontinent because of embryonic ties of the elite. It is an autobiographical journey of young man Ed Husain (Ed since he found in his journey to understand Islam- in Damascus, that Mohammad ‘was an honored name reserved to Prophet, and not to be used in vain’), he traveled right through slush of fundamentalism and radicalism into world of enlightenment and understanding. It is compelling story, a life worth knowing. Each word he writes exudes his experience, his search that I find so very riveting. To some extend it is a study on contemporary world, although richer societies but it rings in here too. Further it is beyond proof that Britain is a breeding ground radical elements, a launch pad. The humane concern of ‘The Islamist’ is what transcends boundaries.

There are many things he writes that I also identify with strongly (as most of you will). Although I had not much to do with far right but in college had brush with Communism (peripheral level at JNU) . There is no difference between ideology based organized groups whether Religion or Marxism initiated, that uproot from sorroundings. So I do identify the initial fervor Ed experienced as ‘brother’ (replace that with ‘comrade’ or sagav). To escape ragging in first year of college I started to hang around with ‘comrades’ whom nobody touched. The very first month I was locked up in toilet –in the lodge next to the college since most first years don’t get hostels, and asked to draw the top view, side view of the closet…which they found to be appropriate dimensions after few hours, this ‘mild’ form of ragging took serious abuse to some whom I knew so I immediately took refuge under comrades who had a very strong presence in the college, many stayed nearby. I started to drop into their meetings and listen to discussions; they discussed ‘imperialistic forces’ to policies of state government- grand thoughts, in Malayalam it sounded grander!! Unlike Ed I thankfully didn’t submerge into these groups. I had other circles wherein we went to kovalam and other beaches and did lots of crap still not clear whether good or bad but I had a yen for foreigners those days (‘hey saippu where you from?!!”). Comrades were quite serious and focused people. They did serious planning like thinking up the slogans, going to the college at night and pasting posters that I also took part few times. At one level I found them quite admirable beyond a point very boring!!. Those days college atmosphere had become quite tense due to fight between parties very much supported by outside elements the main being SFI (the student group of Left) and ABVP (the hindu wing). There were night attacks on hostels with knifes, reported quite prominently in news papers even the CM that time E.K. Nayanar visited our Hostel (I liked that man very much, he had great sense of humor) and asked for calm. We like minded students I recall went around the college with guitars and so on singing Lennon’s ‘all we are saying give peace a chance’!!!. Never heard that song before but took liking to it immediately (Lijo-I recall, who headed the band considered himself a ‘born again’. Most ‘born again’ compulsorily had guitars!!). My association with comrades came to an abrupt end when they broke and stamped the image of Goddess Saraswathi that ABVP had put for some function. Saraswathi is Goddess I favored and prayed since childhood (half an hour daily in the evening), albeit I rebelled out as a teenager and rarely went to temple except on some auspicious days but treating Goddess you have somewhere in mind with such appalling manner can hurt deeply. Hence forth I had nothing to do with comrades (Hanish Mohammad though was an exception, nice guy he was and I did vote for him for college chairperson, he now is a senior bureaucrat is heartening). I agree with Ed when he uses the word ‘secular fundamentalists’, these people can be very damaging, they live out of religion fundamentalism, they get their identity from these so in certain way keep radical elements alive by instigations and hyperbolic reactions. Market forces have emboldened them recently.

I also identify with Ed’s revelation through Sufi in particular Rumi. Rumi (Sufism) at one time I read everything about. He was amazing. There is an unfortunate incident that I would like to relate here. Iranian cultural centre had organized a talk on Rumi for which I went with lots of expectation and excitement. Everything went fine till one Indian muslim (fundamentalist to core) objected to the translation of a verse wherein ‘guru’ was used. He said that was Hindu word, the Iranian tried to explain that it is as good as English and we need to get to the essence of the word and verse but the Indian was adamant and stalled the event for sometime, I left very disheartened. Rumi is beyond all this crap.

Amartya Sen’s writing on ‘more to identity than religion’ Ed experiences in Syria. At one stage he is exasperated “….. such questions of ‘origin’ infuriated me. I would argue that the millions of Syrians from coastal regions crossing into Lebanon could not possibly claim to be ‘Arab’. They were a conquered people. If they could become Arab by virtue of speaking Arabic, rejecting their Phoenician heritage, and accepting islam, then I was British by virtue of birth, upbringing…..” . Later there is a reference to ‘Turkish occupation of Syria’ which Syria resents even today.

I always used to wonder on British giving asylum to known terrorists in 1980s and 1990s, my conclusion was ‘arrogance and chickens came home to roost’ but Ed enlightens through one Bernie “…allowing Oma
r to stay in Britain will give them a good start, a diplomatic advantage, when they have to deal with Islamic state. Having Omar serves them well in future. M15 know exactly what we are doing, what we are about, and they have given green signal to operate in Britain”. Now that is interesting!!. I never underestimated deviousness of British elite, it is about packaging as 'multiculture'/'freedom of expression'!!

The Islamist’ is an important book of the time in which we live. It is a strongly suggested book, this blogger hopes it will be translated in as many languages as possible. Ed’s life need to be read. Albeit I am not much of a British admirer nor I agree with lines like ‘Saddam Hussein effectively invited the US army to invade Iraq by playing cat-and-mouse games with UN arms inspectors”. Despite these small differences this book is a book of hope and sanity in an increasingly radicalizing world.

The Kite Runner of Khaled Hossieni is another book I read recently (The fact that both these books are from Islamic world is
quite a coincidence and not an attempt on ‘secularism’!!. Don’t make me cringe!!). The Kite Runner is a quite a warm story written in first person on the events in Afghanistan. The demise of Afghan society is narrated in all its poignancy. I rather enjoyed reading about kites, kids running to catch fallen kites hence the name of the book ‘kite runner’. The story too ends with flying kites in USA and hopes for a new beginning. It is a good book, I don’t like nitpicking but how will a kid who has all his life lived in most depraved condition in Taliban Afghanistan know about usage of napkins in the first few instance!! “…some of it dripped from the corner of my lips. Sohrab handed me a napkin and watch me dab at my lips…”(page 280). I am pointing out since as a reader it was jarring out- western sensibilities, not a big deal though and I could be wrong!.

The Kite Runner is a great book I liked it very much, although the reason I bought was the cover -the kid and the title. It reminded me of my childhood (I even had that type of T shirt and white PT sho
es, just about that age!!). In Jaipur kite flying was one big event. For three years I was really really into kite flying while schooling in Jaipur. Makker Sankranthi is the day to be in jaipur. They even had lamp kites for night!!. We used to call our principal in school ‘chand dhara’ which was name of a kite, the fellow was bald and nasty!!(name of kite varied according to design). Running for katti pathang was another major occupation. Many of language usage in here centered around kite flying like if somebody said something you don’t believe then we say ‘deel deel’ and make action of charkha in hand and so on. I was reminded of words that I had long past lost (some similar to afghani): dori, manja, kanni….and most importantly the excitement of woh katiya hai….the anthem, the unparalleled victory song!!. Three years in Jaipur was like a dream for any kid.

The Kite Runner I would strongly recommend. I bought it from the pavement for 50Rs and I suggest you too.

Sunday, September 09, 2007

Gentlemen’s fate !!

There is a thing about fate the more you keep it precious intriguing it gets. Intriguing for people who have no say. Matter of opinion for people who decide. In case of gentlemen’s game it is about bad decisions. It is about batsman looking up at the sky and cursing his fate, commentators sharing his predicament albeit between shrieks. And then the world is back to normal.

Umpiring in cricket has been questioned, the technological innovations have shown many a time that umpires have erred but then fate has something else to say on these worldly matters. The excitement of succumbing to fate has its own charm in gentleman’s game. The predominance of right decision over umpire’s folly will give away the fun. It is also about great burden of tradition that some are meant to carry at whatever the cost.

People watch cricket to see the best side win, the best player perform, umpires are just the facilitators. They have absolutely no other role to play. The rightness of the decision is what matter and not the idiosyncrasies of the man who happens to arbitrate. If the technological innovation has helped in reaching right decision then that is what matters. It seems in gentlemen’s game an umpire epitomizes qualities of gentleman meaning the British understanding of rightness (which our very own Gandhi took some pride!). The umpires it seems are ordained to carry this British rightness till the redemption day, players live a cursed life in this world view, audience get better understanding on destiny while the commentators can add factors like ‘umpire’s decision’ to ‘pitch behavior’ in their dreary life.

Britishers, as usual were never really right. They created rightness in what was wrong like following rules while colonizing a country and exploiting people, like recently attacking a sovereign nation flaunting all known international rules and norms and still claiming right. The weight of carrying the right at the expense of wrong is the tradition the umpires in cricket field bear, what better setting than Lords!!. So Sachin Tendulkar can now pay obeisance at Tirupathi and appease God in his favor, after all it sure is bad luck to be at the receiving end of wrong decisions more than many occasion in recent past. The fault obviously is with God. God now have to match wits with umpires. The britishness of things!!. Recently though Coconuts have taken over to carry the burden. The rules for rules sake, the rules for us to have control.

Umpires are about power, the authority to decide, the finality of things. As carrier of British rightness they are symbol of supreme that cannot be questioned even if it is a blatant mistake, nothing can predominate their verdict, it goes to eternity, etched in time. God has but to accept!!. It is about ‘you may be good player or bowler but you cannot defeat the fate’. The charm of ‘make or break’ held by least of talented is what history is all about, and struggle against gives charm of a good story. Any takers!!

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Is Nuclear Energy the Energy of the future?

Einstein’s equation E= mc2 changed the way we understand Energy. A small mass could produce immense energy since it is multiplied by square of speed of light (which is 3x10^8m/s square and that is whooping 9x10^12m/s!!). Now that is huge amount of energy, the destructive power of which was demonstrated in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Children are taught in school about controlled chain reaction, that is, channelising this fission energy for beneficial purpose. There is huge energy to tap. Many nuclear reactors are constructed around the world for this purpose.

When other source of energy are depleting, nuclear energy looks like a hope. The capacity of Non conventional energy or renewable source like the wind or solar or geothermal seems to be very limited at this stage although they remain the most environment friendly. The need for reducing green house gases has led to attempts in decarbonising energy source. It is clear that nuclear energy will not fulfill all the energy need of the future but it will significantly supplement. This blogger will advocate nuclear energy provided three conditions are fulfilled.

One is the key issue of safety and disposal of waste
This line I came across in the Net expresses the predicament regarding radioactive nuclear waste. ‘The stuff we are dealing with can’t go away until it decays. You can containerize it, solidi
fy it, immobilize it and move it, but you can’t make it go away’ (James D. Werner, Scientific American, May 1996). Typically, a large nuclear power plant of generating capacity of 1000 MW electricity produces ‘around 27 tonnes of high-level radioactive waste (HLW), 310 tonnes of intermediate-level and 460 tonnes of low level radioactive waste. The amount of HLW worldwide is estimated to be currently increasing by about 12,000 metric tons every year. The level of radioactivity and half-lives of radioactive isotopes in low-level waste are relatively small. Storing the waste for a period of 10 to 50 years will allow most of the radioactive isotopes in low-level waste to decay, at which point the waste can be disposed of as normal refuse. Most of the radioactive isotopes in high-level waste emit large amounts of radiation and have extremely long half-lives (some longer than 100,000 years), creating long time-periods before the waste will settle to safe levels of radioactivity.

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is promoting acceptance of some basic tenets by all countries for radioactive waste management. These include: (i) securing acceptable level of protection of human health; (ii) provision of an acceptable level of protection of environment; (iii) while envisaging (i) and (ii), assurance of negligible effects beyond national boundaries; (iv) acceptable impact on future generations; and (v) no undue burden on future generations. There are other legal, control, generation, safety and management aspects also. The radioactive waste management approach is to consider the nature of radioactive elements involved in terms of their half-lives and then choose the appropriate method of handling.
1) If the concentrations of radioactive elements are largely short-lived, then one would resort to what is referred to as ‘delay and decay’ approach; that is, to hold on to such a waste for a sufficiently long time that the radioactivity will die in the meanwhile.
2) Second approach is to ‘dilute and disperse’ so that the hazard in the environment is minimized.
3) But when the radioactivity is long-lived, the only approach that is possible is to ‘concentrate and contain’ the activity. In order to carry out concentrating the waste (generally the sludge), chemical precipitation, ion exchange, reverse osmosis and natural or steam evaporation, centrifuging, etc. are resorted to. The resulting solids are highly concentrated in radioactivity.

Triet Nguyen, Department of Nuclear Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, has written in an article ‘High-level Nuclear Waste Disposal’, (1994) that “High-level nuclear waste from both commercial reactors and defence industry presents a difficult problem to the scientific community as well as the public. The solutions to this problem are still debatable, both technically and ethically ... . There are many proposals for disposing high-level nuclear wastes. However the most favoured solution for the disposal of these wastes is isolating radioactive waste from man and biosphere for a period of time such that any possible subsequent release of radionuclides from the waste repository will not result in undue radiation exposure”.

The gist here is although we are aware of the dangers of radioactive wastes but we still don’t have a very safe method of disposal of nuclear waste as also monitoring system for these. Also safety issue within the nuclear reactor is another major concern. Chernobyl was an eye opener and so are many of the places where nuclear reactors are located, it has adverse affect on human population (I saw a documentary on this long time back….by Anant Patwardhan?).

Second is the issue of sharing this source of energy. Why is that only some countries allowed the access to nuclear energy? What is so special about USA or India that it can use this energy while countries like Iran or Sri Lanka is denied? Scientists in particular Einstein did it for the sake of humanity, meaning it should not have any geographical limitations. It will be in the interest of international community if these installations are under control of international agencies like IAEA or UN.

Third is the most significant one and that is there should be a standard formulated to distinguish peaceful use of nuclear energy from military. Military use of nuclear technology that is Bomb making should be outlawed (cartoon taken from Net). Nuclear bombs are not only anti human it is against the very survival of life. Nobody can win a nuclear war. And so the nuclear arsenals in USA or Britain should be decommissioned and dismantled or transferred to UNSC for ‘minimum deterrence’ from any rogue nation. (Since USA dependents on world market to sell its product the countries could take measures to hurt US economy, the crux is that countries stockpiling nuclear weapons should be dealt at the societal and individual level internationally). If this is not done then every country in the world has sovereign right to defend itself, democratic Iran in specific. The Iran issue also has to do with religion. The reason why American administration is so vehemently protesting is because Iran is a Muslim country. The far Right in USA (that control the Bush & Co.) doesn’t want Iran to get the bomb for this very reason (I happen to watch Christiana Amanpour’s God’s Warrior in CNN recently. It is a must watch). A pastor even advocated attacking Iran to prevent it from making nuclear bombs!!. It is shocking how the product of Science and Technology (which they don’t believe in et al evolution) should be the reason for superiority claim. Also the paradox of claim of peace by the religion and WMDs in the backyard!!. The duplicity is astounding!!.

The nuclear deal of US with India if it contains provisions on Military use should be rejected. The political parties protest doesn’t seem to be on these lines. Sitaram Yechury (comrade who loves camera and studios) was quoted saying deal would take away ‘sovereign right to nuclear test’. Such an appalling statement.

Clearly society cannot solely depend on thermal or hydroelectric means for energy; the environmental ramification is significant, further it may not be able to provide for exponential energy demands. The need for ‘decarbonisation’ also put pressure on energy requirement. It is clear that nuclear energy will significantly contribute to needs in future, risks are however high unless the above mentioned factors are taken care. In the meantime countries need to focus on implementing the commitments made in the World Summit in September 2005 to take action to promote clean energy and energy efficiency and conservation, accelerate the development and dissemination of affordable and cleaner energy efficiency and energy conservation technologies, and promote and support greater efforts to develop renewable sources of energy, such as solar, wind and geothermal.