COGITO ERGO SLUM : August 2005

Friday, August 19, 2005

Who was Mangal Pandey?

For the few who think of Mangal Pandey as just another character role played by Aamir Khan, a quick lesson in history:

So, he's not a fictional character?

Of course not. Born in the village of Nagwa, district Ballia, Uttar Pradesh, Mangal Pandey was introduced to history books as the sepoy who played a major role in the Indian uprising of 1857.

He was a soldier of the 34th Native Infantry whose attack on a superior officer came to be recognised as the event that sparked India's First War of Independence. Little is known of his life before that momentous incident but he has been declared a martyr since.

What happened that day?

Pandey attacked his British sergeant and wounded an adjutant. The office in charge, General Hearsay, noticed that Pandey was in the throes of some sort of 'religious frenzy', and ordered a jamadaar to arrest him. The latter refused.

Surrounded by guards and European officers, Pandey tried to commit suicide by shooting himself. He was seriously wounded, and promptly arrested.

Following a court-martial on April 6, he was hanged at Barrackpore on April 8, 1857. As a collective punishment for his act, the entire regiment was also dismissed.

Was he India's first freedom fighter?

According to records at the Jabalpur Museum, Pandey was to be executed on April 18. But he was hanged 10 days earlier to prevent the regiment from harbouring ill will against superiors. The English were also aware that news of Pandey's death could spark more unrest.

Going by the date on which he was executed, Mangal Pandey became the first freedom fighter and martyr of 1857.

His name has since been synonymous with revolt.

Has Pandey been in the news before?

Yes. He made an appearance in newspapers not so long ago, with the release of Mangal Pandey: Brave Martyr or Accidental Hero?, a book by Rudranghsu Mukherjee.

The author claimed Pandey was an ordinary sepoy who, under the influence of bhang, committed a reckless act for which he was hanged. Mukherjee's analysis examined whether Pandey really was the heroic figure history had made him out to be, or just a soldier who happened to get lucky.

The book had its share of controversial statements such as: 'Nationalism creates its own myths. Mangal Pandey is part of that imagination of historians. He had no notion of patriotism or even of India. For him, mulk was a small village, Awadh.'

It also went on to claim that Pandey's action was contrary to the spirit of insurgency: 'A rebellion is a collective will to overthrow an oppressive order. Pandey acted alone; he was a rebel without a rebellion. The name Mangal Pandey meant nothing to the sepoys who raised the revolt in 1857.' Luckily for us, no post-publication riots ensued.

Does he ever appear outside history books?

You might want to try the post office. The Indian Posts and Telegraphs Department has issued four commemorative stamps in the memory of freedom fighters, one of which sports the face of Mangal Pandey. Interestingly, British author Zadie Smith's award-winning novel White Teeth also has a reference, with Pandey cast as the fictional protagonist Samad's great grandfather.

Why did Mangal Pandey do what he did?

There are a number of reasons. To understand his action, one must analyse the religious, social and political milieu in which he operated. In a nutshell, the British already had given the Indians much cause for unhappiness, thanks to the doctrine of Lapse, the forcible introduction of a British system of education, and social reforms that didn't exactly go down well with the higher castes. The sepoys were also dissatisfied with army life. Coupled with low pay, their need to constantly pit themselves against their countrymen also took its toll.

To make things worse, the East India Company introduced the Pattern 1853 Enfield rifle. Its cartridges were covered by greased membrane that, apparently, had to be cut by the teeth before loading. There was a rumour that this membrane was greased by cow or pig fat, which was offensive to Hindu as well as Muslim soldiers.

The British tried reasoning with the sepoys, and even asked them to make their own grease from vegetable oils. The rumour, however, persisted. General George Anson, Commander in Chief in India, reacted by saying, 'I'll never give in to their beastly prejudices.' He refused to compromise.

Then, on March 29, 1857, at Barrackpore near Kolkata, Mangal Pandey started an open mutiny, inviting his comrades to join him.

The Rising had begun.

Study: In dating, extravagant gifts keep on giving

If you want to win the object of your affection, an extravagant gift that has no resale value is the way to go.That's not the opinion of a battle-weary veteran of the dating scene. It's the conclusion of a mathematical model created by researchers at University College London.
Dating obviously involves gifts, and not just among humans. Gift-giving also appears in the mating rituals of some insect species. A team of applied mathematicians created a sequential calculation as a model of dating. The new study, designed to explore the role of gift-giving in courtship, appears online in the biological science journalProceedings of the Royal Society According to the model's creator, Robert Seymour, a math professor at the university, this model reduces dating to a collection of numbers.The researchers assigned points to an array of courtship behaviors, including gift-giving. The computer considered the hypothetical facts, mulled over a few variables and calculated which behaviors would result in the highest score for the imaginary male or female dater.This is what applied mathematicians do. They look at these kinds of outcomes and interpret them in a biological framework.
Because the goal was to understand the role of gift-giving, the researchers varied the type of gift the man could give. (Political correctness aside, it was a given that the man was the pursuer and gift-giver.)In the model, a man chooses a worthless, valuable or extravagant gift. Valuable gifts might include diamonds or appliances, expensive items that have intrinsic value in that they are useful and can fetch a good price if resold. Extravagant gifts, on the other hand, would be something like dinner at a fancy restaurant, tickets to a Broadway show or a moonlit serenade. The value of these gifts is just in the experience.
The model showed that extravagant gifts had the highest score for both men and women. In Seymour's interpretation of the results, women feel confident that they have found a strong and committed mate when they receive an extravagant gift. And men avoid gold-diggers by giving only gifts that have no intrinsic value.
"In order to create trust, it has to work both ways," Seymour says. "The male signals his commitment by giving a costly gift, (but) the male has to avoid a female who will take his assets and then say 'get lost.'
"Would flesh-and-blood women really prefer a horse-drawn carriage ride to a diamond? Relationship experts have mixed feelings about whether the model's insights translate to real life.
Linda Carter, a couples therapist and director of family studies at New York University's child studies center, sees some truth there. "The more the energy, cost, extravagance - the attention - that goes into (a gift), I think the assumption would be that he is really interested."
But personal touches and shared experiences should be considered extravagant, she cautions, rather than costly grand gestures, because these are the best indications of commitment and interest.
Daniel Kruger, a psychologist at the University of Michigan, says the model is a simplistic take on highly complex behavior. "It's interesting to look at, but I wouldn't make an inference about what to do in a relationship based on these models." Kruger is interested by the evolutionary interpretation of the results. The male peacock's beautiful, and cumbersome, tail might be an example of extravagance in the animal kingdom, he suggests.
"If women are complaining about how men are in relationships, they should think about the hanging fly," Kruger says. The male hanging fly gives the female a gift - a large dead insect - only to take it back after mating to be used in his next encounter.
This was a study conducted by the University College London

Thursday, August 18, 2005

Inlaws and Outlaws: Arranged Marriage

“Why do the lead pair run around and roll about so much during a song sequence?” he asked, in genuine puzzlement, as though he were trying to decipher some deep-seated cultural response to falling in love that he had missed.

I assured him that the average Indian woman does not typically spring up and scamper off over hamlet, hill and dale with her lover in hot pursuit. But the question made me think about things that I had taken for granted. I tried to explain the gulf between reality and “reel”-ity. “

So… do you think you will have an Arranged Marriage?” he asked at the end of it. His tone suggested that it would be similar to offering myself up as the main course for a cannibal dinner.

“I don't know,” I shrugged. “I may, or I may not.” This was about four years back when I used to work with Steve at Janaagraha That was the time when I couldn’t really take care of myself lest think about falling in love or think about marraige and taking care of someone else.

When I think of marriage I recall what I had read in Alice and Wonderland as a small boy. Alice said “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” And so it is with the Indian Institution of Marriage.

No doubt a lot of things have changed over the years but some things stay stubbornly the same. People still want their spouses to be “fair.” Divorcees still claim “innocence.” And people mainly advertise their degrees and salaries as bait rather than talking about who they are.

The plain truth is that given the limitations on socialization between men and women in India, arranged marriages remain the norm for the vast majority. When I come to think of it a lot of things haunt me. When I see the girl and reject her(based on a photo, let's say), how will it affect the girl or guy, for that matter? Is it fair, or is it just the practical way of going about it?

I beg to differ. Having seen the highs and lows of arranged marriages I suppose I have other ideas in life. One point I would like to make clear is that I personally have nothing against arranged marriages. I always live life with my own perspective.

Should I marry someone just because my parents like her? Should I marry her because she is pretty and I can boast about it? Or should I marry her because our horoscopes match. The “tallying of horoscopes” is a necessary part of matchmaking in Southern India, as I think it continues to be in other regions as well. I think of astrology as a science that too often sanctions the mating of alligators and orangutans. No matter how spectacularly meshed one's horoscopes may be, only the most fatalistic could view it as a proper substitute for questions like:

“What is your opinion about Global Warming?”

Or, if you want to get really specific:

“Will you share in the cooking and laundry?

There are a lot of things that I fail to understand at this point of time and I suppose arranged marriage is one that I will never figure out. When I first told me mom about my girl friend she was shocked as most mothers would be. Not that she had anything against me falling in love until the point that I told her that I had. All hell broke loose after that. She said things like “I won’t be happy if you marry her”, “Do things the way I want till I am alive”, “Why does she call you often?”, “Why does she come home?”, so on and so forth. The initial way of all mothers to get their way is to shout which she too did with perfection. When she realized she had failed with that she unleashed the biggest weapon women have “EBM” Emotional Black Mail. Fortunately or unfortunately that too failed.

I had to make her realize that it was my happiness that mattered and not hers because it was I who had to live with her for the rest of my life, and coming to keeping her happy till she was alive I made her realize that she might live or another 20-30 years max but I gotta live more than that in the normal course. So I had to make the call not her. I also made her realize that keeping her happy and keeping myself happy were different issues and they should not be mixed. And as to why she came home I had to tell her that it was just to socialize with family members which my mom has unfortunately not done till now. Not that she has a choice.

She also says that she is happy with her arranged marriage and so are all my relatives. I have seen all the HAPPINESS and don’t want that kind of happiness for myself!!! I would rather try my own ways of doing things first. That’s the whole point of being an individual.

“I love my mom” and I can stand in a crowd and shout at the top of my voice. But that is not the issue. I also love myself. I have my likes and dislikes the way she does. I have duties that I must fulfill towards her but I have my rights too. I really would not appreciate if anyone tried to take that away from me be it anyone.

Having been active with school activities through the alumni I was involved with a lot of teenagers. There were a lot of these relations that were going on. I think back to a conversation I had with a school junior. When we had some time to ourselves, she asked casually “Anna (Big Bro in Kannada), which do you think is better, arranged marriages or falling in love?”

If she expected a sage sermon on the need to make a responsible and well-considered decision, my response must have been anticlimactic:

“My dear, if you're ultimately headed towards marriage, the path to it doesn't matter,” I said grinning wickedly.

“It all evens out in the end I guess!”