In a country where the letters S-E-X spell taboo and the issue is forbidden to be discussed publicly, Dr N. Mathrubhootham’s show on sex truly breaks all barriers (Vexed on Sex?, April 9). He seems to have the necessary panache to anchor a show of this nature and can also lend a humorous touch to conversations around sex. More such shows on TV and Indian parents won’t have to cook up stories when their kids ask them where babies come from.
Apropos With Daggers Sheathed (April 9), I was surprised by the allegation that I have influenced appointments and postings in various ministries. Never have I suggested any name for any job in this or in any other government. I have more useful things to do than influence government appointments.
Apropos The Scene Stealers (April 9), I’m surprised that the i&b ministry should have chosen Macmohan to judge the National Film Awards. His sole claim to fame is his role as Gabbar’s underling Sambha in Sholay. In that case, Sushma Swaraj would be doing great injustice to Kalia—the other underling—if she doesn’t appoint him on the jury in the coming year.
Throughout my long service of 25 years in the Indian Air Force, I’d often wondered why all the flying pilots who got grounded always changed over to the logistics branch rather than more professionally suitable air traffic control or administrative branch (Rotten to the Corps, April 9). Now I know why. The logistics branch is the ordnance corps of the iaf. And all grounded pilots opting for it says it all about the blatantly corrupt corps of the iaf. Corruption can be cleansed only if the powers that be want it.
What a person to review Katherine Frank’s biography of Indira (The Wonder that was Indira, April 2)! Khushwant Singh, as it is, is smitten by the Gandhi family, especially the lady in question. Remember only last year, he had referred to Sanjay Gandhi as "a loveable goonda".
My reaction to Amitav Ghosh’s withdrawal from the Commonwealth prize has been summed up as "labels be damned" in Bibliofile (April 2). I can recognise neither this nor much of what follows as what I told your reporter. I don’t believe any writer would underestimate the power of labels, considering how often we’ve to dodge, disown or work around them. When Ghosh wrote to me about his decision, my response was: "I do agree ‘commonwealth literature’ is a strange beast. But in a strange way perhaps this alerts those of us writing in English to face up to the anomaly at the heart of our existence."
Vinod Mehta in his Delhi Diary (March 26) says: "Sure Congressmen don’t burn churches, they do not demolish mosques ..." Would he like to inform his readers who burns churches or demolishes mosques? Kindly take cognisance of the fact that the plural is in his own writing. It would be nice if he could publish the list of churches and mosques so desecrated.
This refers to Khushwant Singh’s review (The Wonder that was Indira, April 9) of Katherine Frank’s biography on Indira Gandhi. Although Mr Singh has certified the book as "well researched, unbiased...", on behalf of my client Navin Chawla I’d like to say that not only is the book far from being "well researched" or "unbiased", it’s prima facie defamatory of my client. It presents distorted, one-sided and even false facts. Like when he refers to my client and the Emergency by saying that "it was not so much Indira but the people around her who misused its provisions to settle personal scores or enrich themselves..." and that "they included... Navin Chawla". Not content with repeating the libel—which was limited to the allegation of settling scores—he goes a step further by suggesting that, amongst others, my client may also have enriched himself during the Emergency. All references to my client are unsubstantiated, baseless and far from the truth.
Other statements such as the reference to the Shah Commission’s alleged findings referred to by Ms Frank and repeated by Mr Singh are also misleading in as much as in those proceedings, my client being a government servant was compelled to appear. Refused the opportunity of his own counsel, he was given no opportunity to refute the allegations being made against him; all his protests were completely ignored, whilst every improbable and wild allegation was encouraged. My client was totally denied the opportunity to defend himself before a tribunal where judge, jury and prosecutor were all rolled into one. Incidentally, even before the commission itself, it was pointed out that the procedure adopted by the commission was a calculated travesty not only of natural justice and the Commissions of Inquiry Act and rules, but also a scheme of calculated denigration and character assassination under the guise of a quasi-judicial inquiry. It is significant that when those proceedings came to be scrutinised by the Delhi High Court, it held, inter alia, that the Commission was not empowered to make "roving enquiries" or embark upon a "fishing expedition" as it was doing. That its procedure resulted in the denial of the right of cross-examination leading to grave injustice as the witness could make any statement with impunity without fear of cross-examination by the concerned parties and that a court proceeding ought not to be permitted to denigrate into a weapon of harassment or persecution. Thereafter the so-called report produced by the Shah Commission was not even accepted by the government.
Your article may make interesting reading in the way gossip and innuendo usually do but really fails to present a correct perspective. Even Ms Frank didn’t care to raise all these aspects with my client despite ample opportunity to do so.
Outlook in a Polscape item has said (March 12) that cnbc "went a step ahead" and described N.K. Singh as "the most important man in India". However, during our budget day telecast on February 28, where Mr Singh appeared on the programme, I told him that I had read Outlook and got the impression that he was the "most powerful bureaucrat" in the country, more powerful than all bureaucrats in the North Block. He didn’t respond.
Again in his editorial The Power of Silence, Vinod Mehta says: "No journalist...thought it fit to get in touch with Dr Sarma...." Dr Sarma in fact was interviewed on India Talks on January 30, three weeks before the Outlook issue hit the stands.
Saurabh Singh’s cartoons are always on the mark. The one featuring Fernandes Jr (Polscape, April 2) took illustration to a whole new level.
I hope Laloo Prasad Yadav takes a cue from your cover story Seeds of E-volution (April 9) and learn how information technology can truly emerge as a boon for India. Rabri Devi seems more tech-savvy than her husband. She regards e-governance as the key to Bihar’s future. The state cabinet’s already passed a Rs 100 million package of e-governance that would cover 14 districts initially. The state government’s also considering the promotion of Internet dhabas in rural areas with the help of bsnl. The success of Project Gyandoot in Dhar has really triggered off an infotech revolution in India. May the tribe increase.
Anil Kumar Pandit, Lucknow
Indeed digital empowerment of the masses was waiting to happen. I hope the government gives active support to this revolution by providing basic services like electricity and infrastructure. If that’s not asking for too much.
Jaideep Rau, on e-mail
Embarking on the IT trail will realise Gandhi’s vision of India where each village is a self-sustaining and economically viable entity. The only difference is that IT, not the ‘charkha’ will bring about this revolution. Digital empowerment of the masses will also ensure an accountable administration and bring democracy in a real sense at the grassroots level.
J.S. Narula, New Delhi
When I first saw the latest Outlook, I thought it was an April Fool prank. On reading the cover story, I realised it was the joke of the year. The photographs of farmers posing with PCs and fishermen analysing computer printouts may befit a TV ad. What are you trying to sell? Are you agents of some mnc vendor fast-selling its wares in the guise of an IT revolution. The article reports a farmer as saying he wants Chicago prices for his soyabean product. Dreams apart, is he aware that the sluice gates have been opened and there’ll be a deluge of foreign products that’ll drown the poor Indian farmer? Let IT remain the staple for academics and professionals. What will it mean for people in Goliar in Rajasthan, Kanakanahalli in Karnataka, Kishanganj in Orissa or the thousands of such miserable villages in this misguided nation? Please, please come out of your ivory towers and see the plight of Indian villages, sans water, sanitation and decent living.
P. Govindarajan, Bangalore
Your cover story talks of states like Madhya Pradesh, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. Does that mean leaders in the IT revolution like Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka have done nothing worthwhile on their rural front, and their IT-savvy chief ministers are busy attracting only ice investments for commercial exploitation?
Viswanath S. Rao, on e-mail
Thank God at least a few farmers in the country are able to get a just price for their produce, thanks to the Internet which has transformed their lives like never before.
Sandipan Deb’s opinion on Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (Cine Qua Non, April 9) seems to have been written thoughtlessly and in haste. Hollywood knew illogic as far back as during the time of John Ford, when he made Stagecoach. And Hitchcock of course was famous for what he called his McGuffins which are plot elements that are of no consequence but on which the narrative hinges. Remember The Lady Vanishes? The fascination with the absurd is no Bollywoodism that the West might have discovered.
Rajat Ghose, on e-mail
While I do agree Crouching is like a Hindi film, there’s one difference: women in this movie are not mere objects of desire but are respected and treated as equals. The opening shot shows a woman who handles her father’s business and is very independent. The other leading lady, Jen, doesn’t like who she’s getting married to and runs away.
Apropos the stockmarket scam, I do not pity the stockmarket investor; stockmarkets have always been a gamble—you win some, you lose some. What raises my ire, however, are the voluntarily impotent powers that be. There has to be a mechanism to strip scamsters of their assets which can then be used to restore the common man’s money. Till then, there’ll be no effective deterrent to one man making a monkey of us all. Or to others aping his crimes.
