Review: Pink Floyd, “The Endless River”

Pink Floyd’s last album, “The Endless River” was released yesterday (November 10) on iTunes in India and other countries. And I more or less had to buy it, being a fan since my schooldays. I have been an iTunes holdout (we do have a Mac at home but only the kid uses it these days), but I figured this was a good opportunity to give it a try in music purchases (I also picked up a couple more 2014 albums by 1960s-origin legends). Thank you, Steve Jobs, for making DRM-free music available at a reasonable price, storing it in a sensible hierarchy in the iTunes folder, making it easy to copy to other devices. No thank you for restricting it to Mac and Windows users. Since Google Play Music, Amazon Prime etc are not around in India and Flipkart’s emusic service closed down a year ago, Apple has an unhealthy monopoly of this space.

Now for the review itself. The Endless River is a brave effort — an almost entirely instrumental outing, mostly performed by the members themselves (David Gilmour, Nick Mason and the late Richard Wright), arranged in four “sides” of three to seven pieces each. Wright’s contributions were extracted mostly from the sessions for the Floyd’s previous album, “The Division Bell” (1994), but one track (Autumn ’68) dates back to the 1960s and features him playing on the organ at the Royal Albert Hall.

Musical references to their earlier work are many — in fact, to my ears, the second track (“It’s what we do”) sounds so extremely similar to “Shine On You Crazy Diamond parts 2-3″ that I expect to hear Roger Waters’ voice at any moment saying “Remember when you were young…” On several other tracks, too, vocals seems just a few moments away. Nick Mason gets his first songwriting credits since “The Dark Side of the Moon”. All of it is worth listening to, if you like instrumental Floyd. It is new music that provides a retrospective of — mostly — “old” Floyd, 1975 and earlier. It has noticeably fewer guest musicians than “The Division Bell” or 1987’s “A Momentary Lapse of Reason”, and in contrast to those albums, only two tracks have credits for external songwriters — Anthony Moore and Polly Samson, co-credited on one track each. The most striking, to me, are “Autumn ’68” (the organ solo) and “Skins” (a Nick solo on drums). To my mind, though, all of it is in the Floyd tradition, and very well thought out and arranged. I have heard it about three times so far. If you are a Floyd fan who doesn’t think “The Wall” is the absolute pinnacle of their career, I highly recommend it.

The one vocal song, “Louder than words”, is musically excellent but the lyrics, by Gilmour’s wife Polly Samson, are a letdown. I thought her earlier lyrics (on Floyd’s “Division Bell” and Gilmour’s solo effort “On an island” were fine, and Roger Waters’ lyrics are overrated, not least by Waters himself. But in this case, from the shock-value opening slang to the cloying sentiment throughout, I am not impressed. Especially as the sentiment (about “bitching and fighting” and “dissing each other” but nevertheless producing stuff that speaks “louder than words”) would have been more meaningful if Roger Waters had been aboard.

Where was Waters? After the Live8 reunion in 2005, and shared stage appearances by Gilmour and Waters in 2010 and 2011, that seems a valid question. Especially as the 2010 get-together (for the Hoping Foundation, a charity for Palestinian children) was entirely Gilmour’s idea, and the 2011 event (Gilmour guesting on a Waters’ “The Wall” show) was a quid-pro-quo for that. But Waters made it clear via his Facebook page that he does not see himself as a part of Pink Floyd, and the other Floyds made it clear that he was never asked. According to Mason, this is because the music stems from the Division Bell sessions, was intended as a tribute to Wright who may not have been comfortable working with Waters, and was mostly in a finished state — it would have seemed “insulting” to ask Waters to come on merely to play bass. Gilmour goes further, saying that Waters would have needed to be the “sole power” behind whatever he did. All fair enough, but one gets the feeling that at least they could have asked, and given him the choice of saying no. “Louder than words” would have been a much more honest statement if Waters had been a part of it. Gilmour has said that during the 1994-95 “Pulse” tour, he asked Waters whether he would like to join for a show, “with the safety cushion of knowing that he wouldn’t do it.” Perhaps that “safety cushion” was missing this time.

So “The Endless River” is David Gilmour’s creative vision of how Rick Wright should be best remembered. As such, and as an epitaph to the band, the album works very well. I suspect, though, that Gilmour equally intends it to be a statement of what he says Pink Floyd “really” is, and that was the main reason to exclude Waters.

Now, on the evidence of the post-split years, I find Gilmour’s case more compelling. Since “The Final Cut”, officially Pink Floyd’s last album with Roger Waters but really Waters’ first solo album with Gilmour and Mason guesting, Gilmour has produced two solo albums — “About Face” (1984), which he seems to find forgettable but I quite like (check this concert video from that tour for a flavour); and “On an island” (2006), which was the most successful solo effort from an ex-Floyd member to-date. From the tour for the latter album came two live DVDs and a live CD (“Live from Gdansk”, which features Richard Wright on keyboards and the best-ever recorded version of Floyd’s “Echoes”.) He also produced three Pink Floyd studio albums, including the most recent, and two live albums. The first two studio albums met with critical disdain but tremendous commercial success. Personally, I think “A momentary lapse of reason” had too many guests and too little Mason/Wright, but it did contain at least three memorable songs; and “The Division Bell” lacked punch but, musically, was closer to pure Floyd than anything since “Wish you were here”. In that time frame, Waters has produced three solo albums (the most recent, “Amused to death” from 1992, being the least forgettable, but that’s not saying much), one opera (“Ca ira”), a live album or two, and an endless tour of “The Wall”.

Waters certainly provided a “creative vision”, but that wasn’t enough: his solo career shows that he needed the others to make an impact. Gilmour has had far better success in reaching the public with new, original material. Waters accused the Watersless Floyd of “marching around the world singing my songs”, but that was untrue: the concert repertoire of the Gilmour-led band comprised 50% post-Waters songs, and 50% Floyd songs where the remaining members had significant songwriting credit.

Still and all, there is no doubt that Pink Floyd’s best work had critical conceptual, lyrical, and, yes, musical contributions from Roger Waters. Given the thawing of relations and the shared interest that Waters, Gilmour and Mason have in the Palestinian cause, I can’t help feel regretful that they couldn’t have found a way to include Waters in this last Floyd album. Or, at least, approach him and leave it to him to decline.

Prefixes in the 21st century

Dear Economist,

I came across a page on your style guide today via a Washington Post columnist who called you out on it.  It carries the following text:

The overriding principle is to treat people with respect. That usually means giving them the title they themselves adopt. But some titles are ugly (Ms), some misleading (all Italian graduates are Dr), and some tiresomely long (Mr Dr Dr Federal Sanitary-Inspector Schmidt). Do not therefore indulge people’s self-importance unless it would seem insulting not to.

So, your style guide in 2014 says “Ms” is ugly; and as for the preceding “but” and the last sentence, it is not clear what the intended message is, but it strongly suggests that women who use “Ms” are seeking indulgence of their self-importance and need not be thus indulged.

I know that you use Ms. very often in your own publication, as does everyone else.  These days Mrs. is getting rarer and Miss is almost unheard of; in the case of Angela Merkel, for instance, you sometimes seem to use “Ms” and sometimes “Mrs”, which, at the very least, is inconsistent.

There is also the basic question of accuracy: originally “Mrs” meant “wife of” and was generally followed by the husband’s full name (“Mrs Dennis Thatcher”); these days “Mrs Margaret Thatcher” is acceptable, but what about women who have chosen not to take their husbands’ names?  “Mrs Steffi Graf” sounds simply wrong and, yes, ugly (as does “Mrs Merkel” for that matter, since her current husband is not Mr Merkel), and “Miss Steffi Graf” is both wrong and condescending.   Indeed, this is the factor that caused the late New York Times columnist, William Safire, to change his mind and endorse “Ms” back in 1984, though it broke his heart to do so.

It is 30 years since Safire was converted, and about 40 years since the “Ms” abbreviation became widespread; perhaps it is now time to update your style guide?


Several people have told me that they read my blog but I don’t seem to post anymore. You can thank two unrelated threads on facebook, both dealing with language, for this one. They relate to two news items: a Manipuri being beaten up in Bangalore for not knowing Kannada, and the Tamil Nadu Government mandating Tamil as a subject in schools.

But before I start, here is a link to an old (2009) post by my late colleague Rahul Basu on the hue and cry on Marathi name-boards in Mumbai, and the lack of uproar thereof on the equivalent in Chennai — because Tamil boards are in place already without being mandated.

Now, here are quotes from the original poster of the FB thread discussing the Bangalore case: “Well I have lived all my life in Karnataka and I can’t still speak the language fluently. Come beat me!!!” and “I find this stress that I should learn a language because I live here ridiculous.”

And here is my theory: A few people like that poster don’t matter. There are people in Delhi who don’t know Hindi, people in London and New York who don’t know English, people in Paris who don’t know French. Some of them have spent their lives there.

But when it becomes the majority of the population — worse, when it becomes an aggressive ideology that you don’t NEED to learn the local language (as is the case in Mumbai), it is offensive to the local people (you are telling them that their language is inferior); and you are encouraging the linguistic chauvinists, including the violent fringe.

Mumbai and Maharashtra have lived with the Shiv Sena for decades. Similar right-wing “state-pride” parties have not come to power in Karnataka, but the more Kannada gets disrespected by people who move in from elsewhere, the more such parties will get empowered. The Shiv Sena, too, started with the same sort of vigilantism meted to the Manipuri in Bangalore, long before they actually came to power in the state government or formed alliances with national parties.

I am embarrassed that I lived in Bangalore for 6 years and did not learn the language. I will not make that mistake again.

On the flip side, I can see how much more enjoyable it is to be able to speak a little French when living in France. And, more recently, I learned a smattering of Italian for a week-long visit there, and though my able to communicate would largely have been a failure if it hadn’t been for Google Translate (and for the fact that many of them speak some French and English). the mere fact of my trying clearly influenced their reactions.

Now to the second item, about mandating Tamil as a subject in schools in Chennai. I found the news article ambiguous, but

  • If it were restricted to state board schools and it could be either first or second language, I wouldn’t have a problem and would in fact be totally in favour.
  • If (as the article suggests) it includes central board schools (CBSE and ICSE) then it depends on what is required. Having it as a third language, with very basic skills taught, would be fine. But there is no third language in class 10, and imposing one beyond the other subjects would be an unnecessary load.
  • I am definitely against imposing Tamil as a second or first language at that level in non-state-board schools: it is a challenging language and people moving here from other states should not have to make their children suffer (and, indeed, it will discourage such movement and, eventually, affect the economy).

But this move, again, seems to be a reaction to recent moves (by the Modi government in particular, but also by its predecessor) pushing Hindi on all parts of India. And this is again an example of what I said above in the context of Bangalore and Mumbai: disrespecting the local language will cause a reaction. This is not to justify the reaction, only to point out that the original cause was unjustifiable.

It is disgraceful that a student was beaten up in Bangalore for not knowing Kannada. It is alarming that Tamil Nadu is possibly playing with the education of students from other states in this way. But this does not mean that the people who refuse to learn Kannada, or the people who sit in Delhi and impose Hindi on others, are correct to do so. Two wrongs don’t make a right, as they say; but equally, a wrong doesn’t make a previous wrong right.

Gluten and me

A small fraction of the population suffers from something called coeliac disease — a severe allergy to gluten, a key protein in wheat (the thing that gives bread its springiness and dough its stretchiness). A larger number of people may, it would seem, suffer from gluten intolerance — they don’t suffer an instant allergic reaction on eating wheat, but effects show up on a slower time scale. Exactly what constitutes gluten intolerance, how many people suffer from it, and even whether the problem is gluten or something else (eg, a carbohydrate in wheat) remain controversial questions. Nevertheless, the number of people opting to eat gluten-free, especially in developed countries, has skyrocketed in the past few years. More recently, there seems to be a bit of a backlash against gluten-free diets — see here and here for example.

What follows is strictly anecdotal, not a scientific study: make of it what you will.

A little over a year ago, in April 2013, the three of us went gluten-free. There were several reasons, the primary one being that the kid seemed to have undiagnosed food allergies (he had problems with dairy when young; that seems to be over, but there were still issues). But also on my mind were several symptoms that I had been having — lethargy (caused by hypothyroidism), joint pain, and other things, and several articles on gluten that I had been reading such as this one about a young boy with excruciating joint pain who seemed to have been miraculously cured by going gluten-free. Why not give it a try?

This is not a small project — it means avoiding anything made of wheat (atta or maida), rye, barley, reading ingredients carefully on all packaged food, limiting one’s menu when eating out, and learning new ways to make chapatis or bread at home. More on that later. On the plus side, here in South India gluten-free food — both healthy and junk — is plentiful (wheat is not used in most traditional preparations).

A year down the line, the joint pains seem greatly reduced. The energy levels are higher, but the blood tests show no great improvement in thyroid function. These could well be placebo effects, but what is real was something I did not expect at all. My psoriasis cleared up.

I have written of my psoriasis before. It started developing in 2001, as a small patch on my right ankle. Within a year it was a large patch on my right foot. Over the next several years it spread to my left foot and my left hand. It was always raw and itchy, usually cracked and bleeding. There were days that I couldn’t walk without a limp, couldn’t type with my left hand. The area around the gear stick in my car was covered with flakes of dead skin. I wore socks all the time, partly for comfort, partly because otherwise I left a trail of dead skin wherever I went. I sought treatment three times, from three different doctors. Each time the prescription was a corticosteroid ointment (various betamethasone preparations); the first couple of times, it “cleared up” the psoriasis, but left the skin feeling thick and leathery, and after I stopped it rebounded worse than before. The third time — well, I describe that in my earlier post, but I did try the ointment and it had little effect, while the rebound was even worse.

So, as I say, after April 2013 the psoriasis just started clearing up. I didn’t even make the connection at first, but in May 2013 on a trip to Bangalore I had wheat products a couple of times, and my foot itched furiously. After cutting out wheat again, the improvement was steady — the psoriasis disappeared from the fingers and toes, and the patches that remained retained a dryish appearance but stopped itching, cracking or bleeding.

In December 2013, on a flight to Delhi, I had a bun since there was no gluten-free breakfast available. A couple of days later, the itching and flaking resumed and took 2 weeks to subside.

Since then I have been careful to avoid gluten in any form (even on a trip to Europe — Italy in particular was surprisingly gluten-free-friendly). In February 2014, I gave the corticosteroid another try (for three weeks) to clear the stubborn areas. The psoriasis disappeared entirely from my hand and has not returned. It has also disappeared from the ankle where it originally appeared. There was no rebound. There continued to be improvement in the five months after ceasing to use the ointment. As of today, only two dryish-looking patches remain on my upper feet, unnoticeable unless one is looking for them.

Looking at the literature, I found that there is some evidence of gluten being implicated in quite a few auto-immune conditions, including psoriasis and Hashimoto’s thyroiditis. In my case, this is not all. In the mid-1990s I developed a seasonal cough that remained undiagnosed for years (even by highly-recommended chest specialists) until a modest general practitioner at an academic institute in Bangalore told me it was asthma. I had no shortness of breath, only a cough. A salbutamol inhaler fixed it. In the past year, it seems to me that this, too, has greatly improved: I hardly used the inhaler even during the peak of the usual “season”.

What of the others? My wife sees clear improvements in some other conditions (specifically, migraines — once very frequent, now very rare — and hyperacidity). With the kid it is less clear. But then I had no symptoms until I was in my twenties. I definitely increased gluten consumption — both during meals (I preferred chapatis to rice) and in terms of junk food like biscuits — after I moved from my parents’ home to a hostel. And as a postdoc in Paris, which is where the psoriasis first developed, I was eating gluten three meals a day (what to do, the bread was so awesome, and if it wasn’t bread it was pizza or pasta). It could be that in some people, gluten intolerance manifests itself only with an excess of gluten. Indeed, this seems to be the reason for the awareness in Italy: their traditional diet consisted almost wholly of gluten, and this gluten overdose could be responsible for increased occurrence of gluten-intolerance. The kid, therefore, sometimes eats gluten outside, though we are gluten-free at home.

How can a traditional food item like wheat be so bad for so many people, and is it the wheat or something else that is responsible? These are good questions. Out on the internet, there are several claims that the problem is not the wheat, but the modern industrial process of bread-making; or the high-yielding dwarf varieties of wheat; or merely the fact that most junk food contains wheat, so by cutting out gluten, you eat healthier; or the carbohydrate hypothesis. The trouble with these explanations is that, in Paris where I first developed these symptoms, I ate high-quality traditional boulangerie bread, not the mass-produced sandwich stuff; it is impossible to ascertain what variety of wheat has been used in the batch of flour you buy or the restaurant you eat in; and, sad to say, we have not actually cut out junk food at all, merely replaced biscuits with “thattais” and “murukkus”. As for the carbohydrate hypothesis, even if it is true, the only solution is to cut out wheat, until they develop a variety without that carbohydrate. In any case, though not long ago I would have shuddered at the thought of cutting out bread, tandoori naan, croissants, and so on, my experience over the last year has destroyed any craving I have for these things, and the idea of doing a controlled experiment — consuming certain types of wheat, prepared in a certain way, and observing the effects — has no appeal either. I’d much rather cut the whole lot out.

Much of the above may strike the reader as speculation and unsourced, and it is — I have put in very few links, and while there is some academic literature, it is far from conclusive, while there is a huge amount of speculative stuff on the internet that I don’t want to endorse. This is my experience — it may or may not apply to anyone else. But here is the thing. If you suspect gluten is the problem for you and want to try going gluten free, it has to be all or nothing — reducing consumption may prevent effects down the line, but it will not cure any autoimmune (or other) condition that is already underway. You need to keep gluten out of your system entirely, for several weeks, to know whether it is the cause or not. And what I learned is it is not as hard as it looks, especially if you mostly eat home-made food. If you eat South Indian food, you can easily get by with rice, idli/dosa, and millet “upmas”. But even if you crave pancakes/chapatis/bread/pizza, it is not too hard.

Here is the current gluten-free mix I use:

  • 500 grams white urad dal (skinned black lentil) flour
  • 500 grams white rice flour
  • 1000 grams jowar (sorghum) flour
  • 500 grams corn starch

(The urad flour betrays my locale — an idli is surely the perfect example of a springy, spongy dumpling made with just two ingredients, rice and urad dal, without even added raising agents: it ferments naturally, at least if you live in south India. Urad dal is mucilaginous and thus contributes to binding and to trapping the bubbles from fermentation — the main problem with gluten-free flour being that the bubbles can escape, resulting in a flat product, and the result is generally crumbly).

For making pancakes with egg and milk, this works as a direct substitute for all-purpose wheat flour. For chapatis or pizza, mix in a teaspoon of guar gum or xanthan gum (necessary for binding, even with the urad flour included — unless you’re trying a traditional “akki-roti” style method), use milk or yogurt or warm water for kneading, don’t make the dough too dry, and let it sit a while before use (it’s even better after sitting overnight in a fridge, wrapped in clingfilm). For bread, use the gum, and either ferment with yeast and water or just mix with baking soda and yogurt (the latter is more reliable), add an egg (egg substitutes may work too), and mix well to make a wet, sticky batter. There are many gluten-free bread recipes on the internet, mostly with scary-looking instructions on using exact mixes of ingredients, exact oven temperatures, and so on; in reality it is not as bad as all that, and the flour mix I use varies a fair bit (eg, replace some of the jowar or rice with some millet flour, reduce the corn starch, etc). I may post my own recipes at some later point.

More nonsense about the neutrino observatory

Dianuke, with its useful idiots like VT Padmanabhan and its knowledgeable but completely unethical activists like — well, ok, I named one guy on the facebook version of this post, but am leaving out the name here — is spreading a rumour that the India-based Neutrino Observatory is going to be used as a nuclear waste storage site. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of science knows this is complete nonsense, but the Padmanabhans are free to spread their nonsense and their educated friends will let them do it as long as it suits their purposes (one of them said as much in a previous conversation on facebook — he sees it as free speech, or something). Meanwhile, for those who care, here is the INO’s press release on this issue.

(Why do I call VT Padmanabhan a useful idiot? For the useful part, see how he is being used, and for the idiot part, read his previous writings on INO and on nuclear power, eg on countercurrents. Eg, the INO doesn’t use natural neutrinos which are passing through you in the billions this very minute, but neutrinos generated in Fermilab which are dangerous! I refuse to link. But he is enabled by people on sites like dianuke and countercurrents who know better but don’t care as long as it suits their agenda.)

The Delhi University mess

Last year the St Stephen’s College physics department wrote a very clear-minded note on what was wrong with DU’s 4-year undergraduate programme as implemented (even assuming one agreed with the desirability of the programme in principle).  I reproduced that letter on this blog, together with my own impressions.   Many other highly respected people spoke up against the hasty imposition of the programme.   Not one reputable person defended it, as far as I can recall, other than the vice chancellor, Dinesh Singh, himself.   Unfortunately Singh was convinced that no discussion or internal support was needed and his political support was enough.  Now his political support is gone, and he has antagonised almost the entire university.  And the future of tens of thousands of students is unclear.

I’m sure there is a moral in this somewhere.  Everything has a moral, if only one can find it.  Oh right, the moral is don’t politicise universities. 

As for the UGC, the less said the better.  Why did they not take this exact same stand against the programme last year?  What has changed?  We all know the answer. 

Watching the Modi show

Much has occurred since my last post. I expected that the NDA would win, but I did not anticipate the scale of the win, or that the BJP by itself would get a majority in the Lok Sabha. In retrospect, while various people named in my previous post can be blamed for Narendra Modi not being held accountable for what happened under his watch in 2002, that does not by itself explain the scale of his victory. And I emphatically disagree with those on the left (like Nirmalangshu Mukherji in Kafila) who are trying to somehow delegitimise his win by looking at vote share or localised thuggishness. If those arguments are to be made, they need to be made for every election since independence; and if there were strong-arm tactics for the BJP in UP, there were for the TMC in West Bengal too. And if, like Mukherji, one objects to the result in UP or Bihar, the fact remains that, even without the massive sweep in those two states, the BJP is still the largest party by far. For now, like it or not, Modi is here for at least five years.

So far the signs are mixed. I find it promising that among his first actions, even before being sworn in, was to reach out to our neighbours and invite them. Several news items have called it unprecedented; relatively few have pointed out that Nawaz Sharif invited Manmohan Singh to his swearing-in ceremony, but the latter declined. Modi handled it well by calling all SAARC heads and not singling out Pakistan (and not singling out Sri Lanka’s Rajapaksa, despite the opprobrium with which he is held in Tamil Nadu). There seemed to be genuine warmth between Modi and Sharif in particular.

On the economic front, Modi has the mandate to bring in reforms and can hopefully over-ride the protectionist instincts of the RSS. At the same time, news items suggest that he will preserve and re-vamp the social programmes of the UPA government such as the MGNREGA. There is cause to be optimistic on some fronts. But how much socially progressive legislation will be enacted is unclear. And there is reason to worry about the environment.

I am also unenthusiastic about Modi’s silence on acts of vandalism that have occurred since his election, or the threats of arrest, and actual arrest. Still, he has only just been sworn in, and it will take time to know what he actually does about these things, and — most importantly, given his past — how he handles communal tensions.

One thing is clear — with this mandate Modi has no excuses like “coalition dharma” to fall back on: he needs to perform, and to provide a clean government. Any minister who attracts scandal needs to be thrown out immediately, not kept on as in the UPA because of the pressure of allies. If he does not perform, the sweep of 2014 (which, even now, did not include most of the south or the east) will not be repeated. But if he does, his party may make inroads into new states.

The reason Modi was elected was not just his own quality, but the quality of his opponents, and the topic of arrest naturally leads to Arvind Kejriwal, at the moment in jail in Delhi for refusing to pay bail in the offence of allegedly defaming Nitin Gadkari of the BJP. As usual, Kejriwal makes an important point: there are thousands of people awaiting trial in jail for petty offences, who have already served more time than their sentence is likely to carry, but are unable to pay bail. This system needs reform. But the AAP is the biggest disappointment of 2014. They came from nowhere in months, got enough seats to form a state government on Delhi, but then remained in protest mode (blocking the streets to demand, of all things, direct control of the Delhi police), and finally resigned on an issue hardly anybody understands (the merits of their preferred Jan Lokpal bill as opposed to the centre’s Lokpal bill). They could have provided a working government in Delhi and used that credibility to persuade voters in other parts of the country that they were a serious alternative. Instead, after reverting to street-fighter mode, they contested over 400 seats and lost nearly all of them.

The Congress can have hope for its future only when the dynasty and the sycophants accompanying it are history. Sonia Gandhi proved herself to be a good leader; her son is not. Party people recognise this but the response is to call for Priyanka to join politics. I do not see much hope for the future.

The main opposition to the BJP in the future is likely to be a coalition of non-BJP, non-Congress parties. The AIADMK, BJD, TMC won sweeping victories in their home states and, put together, are already a much more significant opposition than the Congress in the Lok Sabha. The 2019 elections will be of interest. vIn the meantime, we can only sit back and watch the Modi show.

[edit]There are a few eyebrow-raising ministerial appointments (though it is true that the BJP has very poor bench strength). On the plus side, B S Yeddyurappa — against whom there are corruption allegations — is excluded. On the minus side, Nitin Gadkari — against whom Kejriwal alleged corruption, resulting in jail for Kejriwal, though he was not the first to make these allegations — is rewarded with a jumbo ministry that combines surface transport, shipping and ports. Then there is Smriti Irani for human resource development: a relatively untested politician for a ministry of such importance is an interesting choice, to say the least, but maybe fresh faces are needed in such ministries. But, worst of all, there is Sanjeev Baliyan, riot-accused in Muzaffarnagar just months ago: rewarding him with a ministerial position so soon would tend to confirm the worst fears of minorities in India.


Now that the Indian general elections have come to a close, who’s to blame if a man who presided over a mass-murder in his state, took no action, victimised honest police officials and NGOs, and refuses to express any contrition over it, becomes the next prime minister of India?

There are plenty of people to blame. There is Atal Behari Vajpayee, PM at that time, who was saddened by the riots but not enough to actually take action. There are L K Advani and Jaswant Singh, who did not speak up then and are consumed now by the man that Jairam Ramesh called “Bhasmasura”. There are the corporates like Ratan Tata, Sunil Bharti Mittal and others, who took the man’s free gifts of land and resources and sang his praises in return. There is the media, which has been relentlessly bombarding us not just with the Messiah’s alleged inevitability but with how he would achieve Gujarat-level prosperity for India (never mind that indices suggest Gujarat is not doing much better these days than earlier, and is lagging other industrialised states on most social metrics — it’s the sensex that counts!). The Times of India here literally sold out its front page to the anointed one for weeks before the TN round of elections. Arnab Goswami showed that he can be a kitten when he wants to be one.

But most of all, I think, one has to blame R K Raghavan.

This man (a “family friend”, whom I have met a few times) chaired the Supreme-Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) which found no evidence of wrongdoing against our possible next prime minister. The spectacular shoddiness of his job is exposed in Manoj Mitta’s book “The fiction of fact-finding”. Excerpts here. Dilip D’Souza’s review here. Several other reviews on the net. I intended to write one myself (I bought the book a couple of months ago) but feel it would be redundant at this point.

But, basically, the SIT asked the man all the right questions, then swallowed all his answers even when they were contradicted by the public record, asked no followups, looked at no other evidence. And there is much else. Mitta persuasively argues that fact-finding commissions, SITs, etc, function — probably by design — to bury such cases, not to bring them to justice. (Mitta’s previous book, which I haven’t read, was about the 1984 anti-Sikh riots in Delhi. He cannot be accused of having an agenda.)

Mitta portrays Raghavan as incompetent in his previous investigation of the Rajiv Gandhi assassination (to the extent of allowing a vital piece of evidence, Haribabu’s camera, to be removed from the scene without doing the paperwork or informing his colleagues — the investigators saw the crucial photos for the first time in The Hindu!) But what he did as SIT head seems worse than incompetence.

If Raghavan had done his job as a halfway-competent police officer, this man would not have been able to brush off his past as he has done and we would not be faced with the prospect of a fascist, supremacist prime minister who is comfortable with the mass massacre of thousands if they are of the “wrong” community.

We will know in a few days who our next prime minister will be. As Arun Jaitley remarked, it will be either NDA or an unstable coalition. If the former, well, those who expect development will be disappointed. Those who argued that a history of overseeing the worst riots of the 21st century (with credible evidence of having, at least, condoned the riots) doesn’t matter because we need “development” will have to live with their consciences. And then there are those who actually subscribe to this man’s ideology. I think and hope that they are a minority.

For any women out there planning to buy a new car…

Be aware that Volkswagen
(a) considers you a threat to road safety
(b) considers you dumb.

Just saying.

Deputy consul case: Be afraid of Preet Bharara

After India’s deputy consul general in New York was arrested for allegedly falsifying visa papers to underpay her domestic maid, the government, and the media, arrested in outrage. The consul was handcuffed! In front of her children! She was strip-searched! She was kept in jail with drug offenders! The Indian government swiftly took retaliatory action against US diplomats in India. The maid was smeared freely in the press, declared an absconder, and the US government accused of some nefarious business, especially when it turned out that the maid’s husband and child had been brought to the US.

Preet Bharara, the US attorney for the southern district of New York and the man behind the charges, discusses these allegations and, despite being constrained by his position on the things he is allowed to say, rebuts most of them very nicely here.

Preet Bharara’s name is now familiar to many Indians for his role in this story. But in the US, he is much better known for other things: if you search Google News for current stories, you will find examples like this. Basically, he has successfully targeted many Wall Street executives for insider trading, the latest being SAC Capital’s Michael Steinberg. He has not lost a case yet in prosecuting insider trading, convicting 77 of 77 defendants with ten pending cases. This is clearly a man who does his homework. But because one of those 77 defendants was Rajat Gupta, apparently Bharara is being accused by some in South Block of targeting Indians!

There is no doubt that, in his statement on the consul case, Bharara is saying much less than he knows. The Indian government has behaved in this matter with unbelievable stupidity and arrogance without ascertaining the facts — to the extent of moving the diplomat to the UN office and retrospectively claiming diplomatic immunity (which will be received only if the US State Department accredits her). Now one wonders whether the US values its relations with India sufficiently to go along with this ploy. But the more interesting question, to me, is what else Bharara has up his sleeve (this is after all the third recent case involving just the NY consulate…)

At the end of the day, the way we in India treat domestic help is a scandal, and, increasingly, an international one. The government and the media are right to be angry but have the wrong target.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33 other followers