Geniuses and Morals: Across The Ages.

This is the week of Tiger Woods. Charles Krauthammer, a very sharp critic and columnist, once praised Tiger for having taught us how to measure genius. For an Afro-American prodigy to dominate an all-white sport in such a manner as to evoke only the superlatives when referring to him it was quite a fall from grace when his philandering tumbled into the open. The reactions were predictable he was told by all and sundry to apologize to all and sundry. He was treated with scorn like a fallen angel who did not deserve to be an angel in the first place. "Fans are disappointed", "children cannot look upto him", his sponsors dropped him, every body felt free to lecture him, some offered spiritual advice on national TV. I shall, towards the end come to this briefly but before that it would be instructive for us to look at other geniuses across the ages and the variety of reactions they evoked for their transgressions. By transgressions I refer only to that which concerns sexual morality.

When a married Mme du Chatelet took Voltaire as her lover, Will Durant notes drily, "the morals of the day permitted a lady to add a lover to menage, if it were done with a decent respect for the hypocrisies of manking; and when she chose not merely a lover but a genius, all the world forgave her". Apparently the Marquis Chatelet was a Lord Chatterley ahead of his times thanks to French customs. Poor Tiger Woods he has to contend with a conservative 21st century America.

Oh wait America is not all that puritan herself. Our good avuncular founding-father Benjamin Franklin with a paunch and a bald pate nevertheless scorched the salons of France with his peccadilloes. Ah its the French again. Thanks to Thomas Jefferson for practicing the egalitarianism that he enshrined in his immortal Declaration, not by freeing his slaves but taking to bed one of them. That reminds me of Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, an orthodox Brahmin, whose servant maid was more than a maid to him. This professor of philosophy, holder of a chair in Oxford later President of India once lectured on the virtues of monogamy with his mistress in the front row (not the maid, come on). Chutzpah, anyone. All that according to a biography by son. Nehru's amorousness had more class his list includes Padmaja Naidu (daughter of poet Sarojini Naidu) and of course the most famous Lady Mountbatten. Mountbatten's biographers note that he was a gentlemanly cuckold. Nehru used to go for swimming in the Viceroy's palace and when Lady Wavell joined him tongues wagged (mostly in admiration I think). Gandhi, with his own skeletons, certified "Jawahar is as pure as crystal the nation is safe in his hands". FDR is today revered for his leadership during Great Depression and WW-II. Being on a wheelchair struck by polio did not deter him from his dalliances with his secretary in his whose arms he breathed his last. JFK's recklessness with Marilyn MOnroe was only a tip of the iceberg, he was the proverbial "mustang" with a compulsive need to sow some wild oats with anybody wrapped in a skirt.

Einstein is thought of as the quintessential professor lost in thoughts pursuing truth but recent biographies have dispelled that idea and show what a hopeless romantic he was. Of course his romances, like other geniuses, was not within the confines of morality as defined in our still-Victorian-age.

If statesmen and scientists have frolicked can the artists be far behind. Tolstoy while calling himself "God's elder brother" felt free to practice socialism with the women working at Yasnaya Polyana. Henrik Ibsen, Bertrand Russell, Byron, Sartre even revolutionary Rousseau all had their share.

Ayn Rand the high priestess of reason and logic had the most ironic affair. She said it was rational for her to have an affair with her protege Nathaniel Branden. The best part was she convinced her husband and Branden's fiancee that this was logical. Finally Branden ditched both Ayn Rand and his fiancee for an attractive young girl Rand flew into a rage, called Branden to her home, slapped him and yelled that "even if she (Rand) was 80 and in a wheelchair she was the best he can have". Interestingly her heroines all have only 'affairs'. What prevented Hank Rearden from getting a divorce and marrying Dagny? Ah but then that would not be interesting, it would not serve the plot later in the book where Rearden gets blackmailed for his affair and Rearden gives up for love what nobody could take from him until then.

How about a businessman who is practically revered, not just for being the 2nd richest guy, but for also being a very down to earth humble person? Warren Buffet is revered as the "Oracle of Omaha", a syllable from him can move the markets of the world. He is admired for living very frugally with zero ostentatious display of wealth. Yet when his wife died and he married the woman he had been living with for decades on the side the press and America just made a muffled noise. If Gandhi indulged in Brahmacharya experiments his Ekalavya like protege Martin Luther King Jr did not disappoint when it came to being romantic outside the confines of his marriage.

Genius, irrespective of the field it operates on, has, shall we say, a compulsive need to defy conventional morals. Its unfortunate that most commentary sees their actions through the prism of conventional morals and says "we admire them yes, they were great yes but we do not condone this and we do not understand why they do this". I am no psychologist but I do not like cast away this complex impulse with simple explanations "ah well they get arrogant thinking the rules do not apply to them". The volcanic creativity of genius cannot be satiated easily and that is not restricted to just what they do in the public sphere.

It is worthwhile to note that most geniuses above did not have to contend with 24 hour news cycles or billion dollar deals on corporate endorsements. When corporations ditched Tiger Woods they did so not because they thought themselves to be custodians of morality it was sheer advertising sense. Who wants to be bracketed with a "in-the-news-for-the-wrong-reasons" guy?

The scale of achievements is also important. Bill Clinton, a compulsive philanderer, left office with a staggering 60% job approval rating well after the impeachment shenanigans. He was a two-term President, a gifted politician, considered the best in a generation (until Obama came), he completely redefined the democratic party, presided over the longest peace time economic expansion of USA and above all he sweated to rehabilitate himself post-impeachment. Elliot Spitzer, disgraced former Governor of New York was hoist on his petard when he was exposed as "client 9" using escort girls. The difference between Clinton and Spitzer was that Clinton became President after acknowledging that he had "caused pain in his marriage" and other factors helped a quick rehabilitation. Also how Bush got elected, the plummeting economy, the crazy Iraq war made many to think wistfully of the upbeat Clinton years. Spitzer blazed to office as a moral crusader against Wall Street captains and  then exposed himself as a cheap philanderer. A man who was thought of as "could be America's first Jewish President" is in the wilderness today.

Yesterday the chairman of Augusta National Club excoriated Tiger Woods publicly just before Woods started off to compete in this years Masters. Billy Payne said " It is the fact that he disappointed all of us, and more importantly, our kids and our grandkids. Our hero did not live up to the expectations of the role model we saw for our children."


It is despicable coming from somebody whose club still discriminates against women. This is classic 'teachable moment'. Tiger Woods did not disappoint anyone with his conduct he is still the greatest golf ever, period. Kids should learn that athletes and pop stars are NOT role models. If at all they should be looked upon ONLY for what they do on the field or on stage. What they do in their private lives is their business lets teach  our kids that and let us remember that too. A commentator talking about Tiger Woods rehabilitation said "America loves a winner, if he wins he will be cheered".


Geniuses torment the world around with not just philandering. There is another kind as Bobby Fischer showed us with his tragic conduct. See Krauthammer's excellent article in Time 


http://www.time.com/time/columnist/krauthammer/article/0,9565,1054411,00.html


 After Shelley had died a friend visited the family and seeing his son, said "I am sure he will live to be an extraordinary man". Shelley's wife Mary replied "I hope to God he grows up to be an ordinary one". Such was Shelley's conduct in personal life.


We would do well to remember what Will Durant said of Voltaire, "all these qualities, good and bad, were secondary, not of the essence of Voltaire; the astounding and basic thing in him was the inexhaustible fertility and brilliance of his mind".Let us thank the Geniuses, let us marvel at them for what they give us and for how they enrich our world even with their abnormal lives.

References :

Billy Payne's speech, http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/more_sports/2010/04/07/2010-04-07_masters_chairman_rips_tiger_for_his_conduct.html

"Intellectuals" --- Paul Johnson
Nehru  - M.J.Akbar
S.Radhakrishnan - S.Gopal
The Passion of Ayn Rand - Barbara Branden
My Years with Ayn Rand - Nathaniel Branden
Story of Philosophy - Will Durant
Freedom at Midnight - Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre
The Dark side of Camelot - Seymour Hersh.
Einstein - Walter Isaacson

Education Part 4: A 6th Grader's Curriculum Vs Faith

A recent poll showed that close to 50% of Americans believed that the "Theory of Evolution" (T.O.E) was false and that the Book of Genesis is the truth regarding how the world came to being. This in a country where NASA exists, MIT and Caltech are hotbeds of scientific revolutions, the National Science Foundation dictates how Science is taught to children. This is the country of John Dewey, father of Critical Thinking. So where is the disconnect?

This past weekend I chatted with a brilliant 6th grade student. A very studious boy, very perceptive, above average intelligence AND a very devout christian upbringing. Talking about a teacher of his he summarized "if he had a choice he would not be teaching". His textbook on history is a wonderful thrill ride that teaches a 6th grader to distinguish between fact and opinion in a historian's writing. The student is taught to identify 'primary and secondary sources'. Class exercises include debating whether "Alexander is a hero or a villain" (conclusion was 'villain'), "whether Caesar was hero or villain? (he started as hero but ended as villain). A complex passage from a historian is presented and the student has to parse for facts, opinions, assumptions, biases etc.Later chatting on what he is taught in science I had a startling conversation.

Student: We study the Solar System in Science.
Me: OH, did you read that scientists have recently proved or close to proving the big bang theory?
Student: I am a Christian and I do not believe that
Me: Oh well what movie do u like to watch?

I knew the student comes from a very deeply religious background and all that I had to do was talk contextually about big bang theory with no allusion to the conflict with Bible, but just a statement in connection with what he is studying in his Science class. The response was a stinging smug reply that smacked of superiority bringing in a factor that had nothing to do with the Science class.

So what happened to the "critical thinking" and "debating freely" that the History class inculcated? When facts come into conflict with deeply held beliefs his beliefs easily trump facts. We all love to be thought of as logical thinkers, open minded and capable of holding a contrary opinion but none of that matters especially in matters of religion. How do PhD's and IIT'ians feel comfortable in indulging in arcane religious rituals that include paying obeisance to ill-clothed, unkempt, repulsively posing mendicants? When one friend refuses to eat in the home of another friend (both of same castes) on grounds of ritual cleanliness I am astounded by the hypnotic  power of religion at its most base manifestation.

Whether its that student in his history class or a professor or an IT professional why does faith so easily silences critical thinking. Why does this attitude trouble me? Simple. George Bush had to struggle with deciding on allowing research on stem cells because of his personal beliefs. Today man lives far better and longer thanks to advances in science.

The answer lies in an article published by WSJ, aptly titled "Critical Thinking: Part Skill, Part Mindset And Totally Up to You".  

"Alfred Russel Wallace, who like Charles Darwin discovered natural selection, was second to none in his capacity for rational thinking and respect for empirical data. At least when he so chose. But Wallace believed in ghosts, haunted houses, levitation and clairvoyance.

...notes cognitive psychologist D. Alan Bensley of Frostburg State University, Maryland. "critical-thinking skills are different from critical-thinking dispositions, or a willingness to deploy those skills...As he (Dr Bensley) puts it, "critical-thinking skills have to do with the cognitive ability of reasoning. Critical-thinking dispositions are more related to traits that determine whether you choose to use those skills."In other words, critical-thinking skills are necessary for engaging in critical thinking, but they are not sufficient. You also have to want to think critically. If you have good critical-thinking skills but for some reason are not motivated to deploy them, you will reach conclusions and make decisions no more rationally than someone without those skills.

So am I suggesting that everyone becomes an atheist? Not at all. Far from it. Endlessly troubled by the philosophical implications of Quantum physics theories Einstein grumbled "God does not play dice with the world", further "God is devious but not malicious". Finally an exasperated Neils Bohr told Einstein "Stop telling God what to do". Even in day to day life many simple souls hold on to religion for a moral compass and as an emotional succor but when it comes to science and facts would readily yield to it. This is not hypocrisy but a gentle compromise that acknowledges what is presented to the mind and still lets the soul draw comfort from religion.

Reference: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116129777148398281.html

PS: Also worth noting is that many portions of the history textbook like that which deals with "who is a historian" and covers the ideas I enumerated are not needed for mandatory study to take the State's test. The state (here Claifornia) clearly enumerates the topics on which a student will be tested and that is a pathetic subset of the wonderful textbook. Hence a motivated student can soar above the rest but if you are studying just to score..well thats the answer for the painful mediocrity of most American students.

Education Part 3: Germany's Graduation Problem.

The Economist recently ran a special section on Germany. What caught my eye was an article on how Germany's education system is seriously deficient. This is Germany, home of the much boasted "german precision equipments", home land of Volkswagen, of BMW, of Mercedes, Carl Zeiss (leading optical instrument maker), crucible of Quantum physics, country of Einstein and Max Planck. We often tend to think of the Western developed world in broad strokes especially when it comes to educational opportunities. The article began with a shocker "Germany invented the modern university but long ago lost its leading position to other countries, especially America. These days the land of poets and thinkers is prouder of its “dual system” for training skilled workers such as bakers and electricians. Teenagers not bound for university apply for places in three-year programmes combining classroom learning with practical experience within companies. The result is superior German quality in haircuts as well as cars.."

When it came to % of population with degree level education Germany had a pathetic 12% compared USA's 31%. In an age when a country's competitiveness in the global market is decided on how many 'employable' graduates they can produce, Germany's focus on churning out 'technicians' is severely flawed.  The dual system (academics + vocational training) has served Germany very well in providing an edge for an export oriented economy but then China is threatening that front. China is still a far cry from dethroning the vaunted German manufacturing that is known for sterling quality that cannot be replicated on a large scale.

What is worse is  that the dual system has a characteristic German rigidity. Economist, notes, "The type of secondary school a German attends, the degree he obtains and the exams he passes classify him for life. The distinctions are made earlier and more rigidly than in other countries. ...Many children are typecast at age ten, which is when most German states decide which of three kinds of secondary school he or she will attend. ..The state bureaucracy acknowledges four career paths: the simple, middle, elevated and higher services. Bureaucrats in one category can rarely aspire to careers in a higher one. "

That kind of feudal rigidity is alien and even an anathema to the average American. Resiliency, the ability to reinvent ones own life, choose different careers at various stages of life etc form the bedrock of this country. I remember visiting Princeton university when a student guide remarked that he was doing some course and that he got disinterested in it finally moving on to Political Science. He was writing a thesis on "Role of primary elections in JFK's election".My dad asked me if he would get a job. I said, maybe, but in all probability he can choose many professions that would use the 'talent' of a political science graduate.

To make the irony sweeter I shall turn to a book I am reading "Great American University" by Jonathan Cole, former Dean of Columbia University. Johns Hopkins university is considered the precursor of a great American tradition, 'the research university'. John Hopkins was referred as "Gottingen of Baltimore" after the University of Gottingen in Germany. Eric Kandel, Nobel Laureate in medicine, notes that the American research universities "had all been inspired by model of German research university in which Geheimrat, the great Scientific leader, ordered the hierarchy of his subordinates". So what differentiated the American research university and what catapulted the American education above its peers?

Thomas Hunt Morgan, trained at Hopkins, working on genetics on the famous fruit fly at, Drosophila Melanogaster, at Columbia University who revolutionized how work is done in a laboratory in a collaborative manner rather than a power hierarchy. Eric Kandel summed up his observation with "Morgan, however, based laboratory governance on democratic principles of merit rather than seniority..and to this day foreign scientists are amazed that students working in a laboratory call professors by their first name". Morgan got the Nobel in 1933.

The role of US government is setting ambitious goals to further education is an undeniable factor too. Lincoln created the "National Academy of Sciences" in 1863. Cole says that the Morrill Act (1862) and the Hatch Act (1887) were instrumental in the spread of literacy by making it easy for colleges to be established with land grants. Take a pause. We see a liberal democracy making spread of literacy as laudable goals in the 1860's. The next real big jump was the GI bill of rights (1944). Right in the midst of a world war FDR and the country worried about how to repay the millions of fine men and women who were sent to defend liberty. Also they worried about how to 'educate' the returning veterans. By 1956 7.8 million graduates owed their education to GI Bill.

References:

The Great American University:Its Rise To Preeminence, Its Indispensable National Role, Why it must be Protected --- Jonathan R Cole. (Pages 19-29)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.I._Bill

http://www.economist.com/specialreports/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15640999

On Education Part 2: Sesame Street and growing up in America

I am often told 'why lament what is missing in India, tell us what is available in US'. What does a child gain  by growing up in USA? I use USA as a shorthand for a "western, developed world".

When does education really begin? Putting aside psychological battles of pre-natal influences and neo-natal learning I'd focus on early childhood. Todays kids grow up watching TV a lot. Parents feel guilty about this but cave in due to life and work pressures. But lets not feel too guilty. We concede that most kids programs are 'educational' but rarely, very rarely do we even realize the truth in that passing comment "sesame street is educational". Several years back I read Malcolm Gladwell's blockbuster seller "Tipping Point". One of the chapters focused on two popular kid programs, "Sesame Street" and "Blues Clues". Much of what I learnt stunned me.


Sesame street debuted in 1969 thanks to a grant from Carnegie Mellon foundation. Joan Cooney is credited with the revolutionary idea of how to "master the addictive qualities of television and do something good with them". "Sesame Street was the first children's television program that included a curriculum "detailed or stated in terms of measurable outcome".
What we glibly dismiss as "educational content" had groundbreaking research in the background. Research that pushed the frontiers of how we understood children learned ideas. Two groups of children were put in two rooms with a TV in each. One room had toys in addition to TV, the other had no toys. When a sample program was played and children were observed for "attention span" naturally the children in the room with toys paid less "attention". But when the children were tested for what they "grasped" there was almost no difference. That was stunning. The children in the room with toys "knew" when to pay attention and grasped as much as the other kids who had no distraction. Elizabeth Lorch, a psychologist from University of Amherst did that research.Ed Palmer, psychologist from Oregon, was known for his research in using TV as a teaching tool. He was recruited for Sesame Street. Palmer devised 'distraction meter' , a notational system to document how kids watch attentively during a pilot run of an episode. It helped fine tune concepts and how they were presented. 


Harvard psychologists, educational researchers and many more are involved in the evolution of what turned out to be the most successful kids TV program on the earth. "By its 40th anniversary in 2009, Sesame Street was broadcast in over 120 countries, and 20 independent international versions had been produced."Thanks to globalisation and satellite TV's today kids in remote corners of the world grow up on what I'd easily call "American staple diet of education" irrespective of their cultural moorings. 


Barney shows, Thomas the train engine, Blues Clues all have very valuable educational edge to them. This is not just about teaching ABC's. Many episodes of Barney, Caillou etc teach nice civics lessons about sharing, forgiving, how to speak politely, how to respect orderliness by using a queue. At the same time none of them feign hypocritical obedience. Children are encouraged to be curious, not ashamed to ask questions. 


Thanks to Benjamin Franklin we have wonderful libraries that treat children as 'patrons' encouraging them to get their own cards. Books, boy there is so much a child in US can enjoy so cheaply and so easily. NYT runs book reviews for children's books. Fantastically illustrated books to teach poetry abound. 


Long back when I was waiting with my wife at a gynecologists office I saw a very instructive moment. A mom and kid were getting ready to leave. The kid, 3 or 4 years old, had drawn something and wondered if she should take it or leave it. The mom addressed her levelly "dear you can take it and show it to your teacher, if not you can leave it too, you have to decide". The kid gave a grin and took it. My thoughts drifted and I shall leave it at that.


References: Tipping Point - Malcolm Gladwell, 
                        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sesame_Street

On Education Part 1 - Ridiculing teachers and loving our college days

Recently I spent a weekend with friends from my college days. One was a university rank holder, the other two had good academic credentials. We were regaling ourselves with college stories. Somewhere along the line an uncomfortable silence descended when as if on cue all three paused and wondered why we had not uttered a single word in praise of any teacher. In fact we were actively ridiculing our teachers. There were 2 or 3 that we would spare as "well he/she was ok enough". That's about it. We had sadistic imbeciles, complete nincompoops who had no idea of the subject, thorough wastrels, absolute time wasters and more masquerading as teachers. A telling comment by the rank holder who went on to do masters in USA and work for premier electronics company designing semi conductors, was "when I started my masters I had  to redo my undergrad in addition to doing my masters".When I gave John Gribbins masterful book "Schrodinger's cat" to my wife, her reaction after reading it was "why is Physics not taught like this. Only now the pieces seem to come together".

Ask any Engineering student about Maxwell's equations he/she might rattle of them without realizing that they are talking about what is considered the most beautiful set of equations and a pinnacle of scientific exposition that married disparate fields of science, electricity and magnetism, thus remaking physics. A diligent high school student would recite Heisenberg's "uncertainty principle". How many know the intricate connection between that and matrix multiplication? That Heisenberg's law upended centuries of Newtonian deterministic model of universe shocking the world and required a congress to come up with a philosophical framework is completely beyond the scope of not just students but even teachers. The wave-particle duality of light has been the battleground of ideas that shaped the world we live in. How many teachers even draw out such contrasts in the classroom? How many are even capable of reading Stephen Hawking's "Brief History of Time" and appreciate the sheer brilliance of writing such a book. A friend of mine, currently a lecturer on Nuclear Disarmament (graduating from Univ. of Illinois) wrote a thesis on Relativity titled "Enigma of space and time". The teacher evaluating it asked "what is this 'enijma'" (he pronounced Enigma as enijma). I remember this after 20 years. In my Engineering course I studied Gauss curvature by rote little did I know how Gauss curvature finds application in cartography until I studied a slim well written book, "Poetry of the universe".

We all can name a few teachers who "did their job" with some flair but I am yet to see ANYBODY say "that teacher inspired me". Even my most beloved professor of English at college was not inspirational. Yes, the literary forum he formed, the competitions he announced and judged with scholarliness all were great for guys like me who yearned for such an outlet and were already cut out for that. But he did not take a mediocre stage shy student and turn him into a thinker. He did not "inspire" a student to be a better student.

Curriculums, rat race etc are all feeble excuses. More than failing its students India first failed with regard to producing teachers who can teach. At the school level this is most dangerously pathetic. Our school teachers are the worst. I studied in the best possible schools (Don Bosco) and elsewhere but barring my biology teacher the rest were just mediocre at best and were scums at their worst. I remember a classmate who, during mandatory recitals, would rattle of Tennyson's "Brook" like a speed reader reading disclaimers for an ad and sit down in a flash. The teacher, happy to see that his student had 'learnt' Tennyson would proceed to the next victim. The words of Nehru describing how Gandhi came "and then he came..." would all be marked off for ERC with little discussion of how Nehru wrote his wonderful "Discovery of India" in captivity or any discussion of Gandhi. We would calculate the maxima minima with the given set of numbers who understood its real time application in designing.

Do we realize the importance of Einstein discovering "curved geometry" to buttress his theory of relativity? How many students can sumarise with a single example the difference with Curved geometry and Euclidean geometry? [The sum of angles in a triangle is 180 deg in Euclidean geometry, on a curved surface for the same triangle the sum of the angles is more than 180 deg, thanks to John Gribbin].

When I worked at McGraw Hill I'd check out the school textbooks and teacher guides put out by MGH. Only then it struck me why a student in America is still better suited for employment than an Indian (Duke University study bears this out). The lessons are so well detailed with real life applications. The curriculum draws heavily from multiple sources of learning. Above all the teacher guides ensure that teachers can do their job really well with a given textbook. Those guides really teach how a subject should be taught with a particular textbook, complete with what exercises to give, how to engage student, how to tickle their curiosity, how to throw a topic for debate, what homework to give, how to introduce the complexity of a particular topic.

When I read books by American academics I shed tears thinking of the pygmies who strut about in gowns in the portals of India. Deans of American universities are scholars of the highest order. Professors publish books that are Pulitzer prize winners. Bharathidasan University VC Ponnavaiko writes as follows on his online CV "Countries/cities visited: Chicago, as tourist". Another VC wonders why Karunanidhi did not get Nobel Prize.In a country where an illiterate R.M.Veerappan was education minister what can we expect.

PS: Why do we mostly talk about our college days like "halcyon days"? Its joyous in hindsight, the carefree days with little to worry about. So when somebody talks fondly of their college or school they are mostly talking of how they had a good time almost never because they had good teachers.

Elections in Iraq and Oscars for "The Hurt Locker"

March 7th made history at several levels on the subject of Iraq. Kathryn Bigelow became the first woman to win an Oscar for "Best Director". In a stunning rebuke to crassy hypocrisy laden pretentious 300 million dollar "Avatar", Bigelow's $11 million "The Hurt locker" took home the Oscar for "Best Picture". 'Hurt Locker' is a grim movie on a bomb disposal squad in Iraq. The script by Mark Boal, also won the Oscar, does not get into the mud regarding the politics of the invasion. Instead the movie focuses on how the US army is arrayed against odds that are tearing the country asunder. Questions of whom to trust, whom to dislike all abound. Is somebody who is flipping open a cell phone is doing just to talk or...to signal an IED towards which a guy, heavily suited, is walking to defuse. Question, in that split second, is should the cell phone guy be shot down by a sniper, what if he was innocent and the shooting further inflames an alienated populace. On the other hand if a moment's hesitation leads to the death  of a fellow soldier who will then go home to a young son and wife in a body bag who can condone the hesitation. All this hangs in the balance in the minds of a very young, probably not even college educated, trained to kill soldier and this is not a classroom in UC Berkeley to debate over a cup of Starbucks latte. This is war torn Iraq. How does one deal with a man who wanders into the "Green Zone" arms raised and crying out "I dont want to die". He is strapped with intricately wired explosives and in an iron frame with bolts too tight to break. Of course he is married, he has children. He was hijacked and put up to this. Timer is running, more lives than just his is on the line, can he be shot dead at a safe distance, would saying "sorry I cannot help you" looking into his eyes ease the conscience of the soldier. A boy selling porn is kidnapped and while attempting to sew explosives into his stomach dies on the table. Searching for the killers soldiers barge into homes, guns flash, hurried ill translated questions, thumbs on trigger. No shots are fired but those families are not going to forget gun toting soldiers invading their private homes to search at will.

On a day when such a movie got the Oscar Iraqis braved acts of violence to vote in droves. UN observers and world press were impressed by a stunning defiance. Sunni's who had boycotted the previous election and became 'insurgents' now came back to vote. Women not only voted but contested elections too. This has been  labeled by all and sundry as a fair multi party election. At the heart of autocracy ridden middle east where women, in some countries, cannot drive or go out without burqa and elections are unheard of this is revolution. Yes it did not happen any sooner, did not happen under more amiable circumstances. Better late than never. Today Iraq has a quasi secular constitution, unthinkable 7 years ago.

America walked into a minefield in Iraq to put it mildly. Iran's ambitions, suspicions of Sunni led gulf states, a horrible history of seething rage that was bottled up with brutal tyranny were all unleashed  to clash on the field add to that botched planning, utopian projections etc you have an unenviable recipe for disaster. A pivotal moment came when the bipartisan 'Iraq study group" advised George Bush to pull out. Bush, in typical fashion, dug in his heels. He was cursed with every imaginable word in the dictionary. Bush ordered the Iraq surge and completely revamped the team on the ground and in DC. The results are there to see today. Thank you Mr President.

Watch this youtube posting http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNKCcZmjlX4&NR=1 , especially see around time stamp 1:30 to see women, without burqa, onstage clasping hands with men as equals in an election rally. This video was taken by Al-Jazeera, which is, to put it mildly, unsympathetic towards USA. Recently a gossip writer, masquerading himself as writer, reviewing Bollywood staple "My Name is Khan" lamented that Islamic nations are being destroyed one after another. America stands tall today, I hope Iraqi's in due time will come to genuinely appreciate their liberation. Many cried hoarse "oil" when Bush ordered the invasion. I am not going to pretend that oil was not a factor at all but this was no colonisation expedition to plunder another country's resources. How many of those oil contracts were awarded to US companies? Not much in actuality. If destroying Iraq was the only concern US need not have spent hundreds of billion dollars or  5000 men and women. God bless America. God bless the brave Iraqis. God bless our men and women in the forces.

PS: The violence in Iraq claimed 36 precious lives. Still far lesser than what is lost in election related violence in India in the 80's or 90's until Election commission started running elections with platoons of army.

Jaipur Literature festival - Changing face of India

The recently concluded literature festival in Jaipur (http://jaipurliteraturefestival.org/) has literally garnered the attention of the world press. Time magazine, New York Times, Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal and ‘The Economist’ all had articles on the festival. I was really struck by that level of attention. A vibrant and accessible intellectual tradition is essential to the progress of a nation.

The Jaipur literature festival is a welcome change that has really impressed me by its content and not merely by the symbolism. Seeing the depth of world coverage I went to their website and was simply taken aback by the professionalism and sweep.

The topics and literary persona were truly eclectic presenting a wide array of ideology that I normally would not credit India with. Some names like Wole Soyinka, Mahasweta Devi, Girish Karnad, William Dalrymple are instantly recognizable. Names like Henry Louis Gates Jr, eminent Afro-American scholar from Harvard, Niall Ferguson, Harvard Historian, Claire Tomalin, author of well received book on Samuel Pepys (ah how many would even know of Samuel Pepys in the first place), Kai Bird, author of Pulitzer awarded biography of Oppenheimer, etc are all known only to a discerning reader.

Given that the setting was India and knowing something of Indian intelligentsia I feared the left wing slant and very impressively I was proved wrong.

Featuring authors like Steve Coll, author of 'Ghost wars' book on CIA & Afghanistan, Lawrence Wright, Pulitzer awarded author of 'The looming tower', Tunku Varadarajan, right wing economist and columnist from NYU Stern business school, Anne Applebaum, author of Pulitzer awarded "The Gulag" a book on the Gulags of Soviet Russia, etc is quite a variety of non-traditional opinion makers not seen in India usually.

The prize for surprise and guts goes to featuring Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a muslim herself, formerly resident of Netherlands and of Somali origin, caused a religious maelstrom in Netherlands with her writings on Islam. Ayaan HIrsi Ali wrote the screen play for Dutch director Theo Van Gogh, movie "Submission" , a movie very critical of Islam. Theo Van Gogh was murdered by a religious fanatic causing an uproar in Netherlands. Ayaan Hirsi Ali's later wrote a highly critical book on Islam, 'Infidel'. THe book was panned by critics but the author was praised for her courage. I am truly surprised that her appearance in India went without a blip. Note that even today "Satanic Verses" remains banned in India.

The article in Economist drew attention to the special section on Dalits and presenting works by Dalit writers. "Room was also made for a group of writers who are little known, even in India: Dalits, formerly known as “untouchables” at the bottom of Hinduism’s caste system. Omprakash Valmiki, whose Hindi autobiography, “Joothan: A Dalit’s Life”, has been translated into English, read poems about the routine wretchedness of the lives of poor Indians".

The best part of Economist's article was this "No special rooms are set aside for VIPs, so the famous mingle with the crowd. And unlike other big book festivals, Jaipur, which relies on a growing list of corporate sponsors to fund it, charges no entrance fee. The most enthusiastic participants are hordes of neatly dressed Indian schoolchildren who sit listening intently as writers finish their readings, before surrounding them to beg for autographs."

A word on the sponsors (http://jaipurliteraturefestival.org/sponsors/). When I wondered about authors like Niall Ferguson, Tunku Varadarajan, Lawrence Wright etc looking at the sponsors list gave an inkling. Merrill Lynch, Reuters, American Center, Shell, Goldman Sachs (that most hated American firm by left wingers). One wonders whether the business friendly, centrist, some even right wing, authors owe their presence to these organisations. Credit to the organisers AND sponsors is that intellectual integrity was not sacrificed to promote ideology. Every featured author had his/her merit.