And finally, it happens. I am a judge for the first time (officially, mind you - its happened several times unofficially). How it happened and AR and I got invited is a long story I will spare you lot. But it was interesting as also mindnumbing at the same time.
Got to judge a bunch of debates at Campion school. 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th stds. That's 4 different debates, not the same one.
Topics: (pleeeeeze dont laugh - not my pick)
7th - Exams test a student's real worth
8th - Money can buy everything, even happiness
9th - Peer pressure is more beneficial than harmful
10th - Migration is eroding Mumbai's individuality
We were allowed to ask them questions after they finished speaking. Trust me, it was really hard to come up with a question for some. I was so clueless about one that I asked:
"Do you think you would be as confident debating in nothing but a pair of shorts, instead of a shirt pant and tie?" - this was for the money topic
In any case, I'm not entirely new to the concept or process of judging. Often, I would sit through a whole moot and judge the mooters, rank them etc etc. I always do it to myself, so it comes fairly naturally. But the questions...jeez.
One poor kid totally choked and simply repeated the propostion. Then he looks at me (rather arrogantly, I might add) and says, "Do you have any q's". I really feel like laughing, but I give him my elder-brother-sympathises with-you smile and shake my head!!!
Anyway - the crux of the whole thing is that I made 300 bucks in crossword vouchers. Will venture after exams and pick up a nice book. Suggestions are welcome.
Studies are going terribly. I am remaking my schedules every 36-40 hours. Am really unprepared and am very stressed out about the fact that I'm not stressed out.
"Don't know much about history
Don't know much biology
Don't know much about a science book
Don't know much about the French I took"
-Simon and Garfunkel - What a Wonderful World (...will leave out the remainder of the verse for reasons you'll figure if you know the song)
Friday 28 October 2005
Friday 21 October 2005
Monday 17 October 2005
Prostitution and homosexuality in India
The Planning Commission has finally done it. It has recommended that the legalisation of prostitution and homosexuality be looked into as they represent the two most vulnerable groups as regards HIV/AIDS. See here for TOI's piece. I think this is a good step, taken a tad late though.
Firstly, what is the current position? The Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act (ITPA) doesn't actually ban prostitution per se. It only bans one, trafficking (naturally) and two, solicitation. So in a nutshell, the two of us can have an agreement (a valid one too) where we decide that I will pay you Rs. n and in exchange you will have sex with me. What is not legal and will therefore be a void agreement (and illegal) is you coming to me and saying that you are willing to have sex with me for Rs. n.
A little on the basics of contract law for you non-law people:
In order for an agreement to be arrived at (legally), there has to be an acceptance and an offer. If the agreement then satisfies certain conditions (laid down in Section 10 of the Contract Act), it is a contract.
It is obviously a pretty fine line therefore, between solicitation and mere agreement and one which the courts invariably do not see. Also, the fact remains that without solicitation, it becomes almost impossible to actually come to an agreement. How do you and I telepathically communicate that (a) we want to have sex and (b) that I will pay you Rs. n to do so?
The only way out, of course, is if I ask you whether you are willing to have sex with me for Rs. n. If you say yes, then it is an agreement and the sex is not solicited by you. Unfortunately for the two of us, this sort of argument in court will have judges throwing the briefs and a couple of large books at your lawyer.
What legalisation of prostitution does, in a nutshell, is empower the CSWs (Commercial Sex Workers). As of now, they are thoroughly exploited by the police, sexually and otherwise. This is because the police can, at any point of time, simply say that they were soliciting, throw them before a court, which I'm sorry to say will never rule in the CSW's favour, not in India certainly.
In Calcutta's red light district (Sonagachi) they've had tremendous success in keeping the spread of HIV down by empowering the CSWs to say 'no' to customers who refuse to use condoms etc. They, to my best recollection, formed a sort of group/buddy system where CSWs would take care of each other directly rather than through the brothel owner (the 'madam'). The NGOs working there also have a huge number of awareness programmes, not just about health, but also legal awareness etc.
Once you make CS work legal and allow brothels to open up in select areas of cities and towns, you allow CSWs to regulate the terms of their employment. They would become employees of the brothel. They may even fall within the scope of 'workers' under the Industrial Disputes Act, which would give them wide ranging benefits, from compensation for work related diseases to a minimum wage etc etc.
How and whether at all this can actually be implemented at the ground level is quite another issue and remains one that can only be answered once the legal structure is in place.
Next is the issue of homosexuality.
I'm going to spare you all the normal BS about the issue, cos it's not worth your time to read it, nor is it worth mine to type it. In a nutshell, I agree with Mill's idea of liberty. Do what you want so long as it doesn't affect anyone else. There are two ways to approach the issue:
1. Socially - My take is let homosexual intercourse be legal and even legalise marriage at a later stage.
2. Biologically (ie looking at mankind as a species) - I came up with an interesting, yet possibly frivolous rationale while discussing this with a couple of friends in one of my less lucid moods.
Taking a start from Mill's POV, what is harmful to others? The question I had was: does homosexuality affect the human species as a whole? My hypothesis follows (forgive any inaccuracies in my maths...please correct me in your comments)
Rayleigh's curve is a bunch of mathematical equations which are broadly represented by this graph: (not to scale)
The black graph represents Rayleigh's original curve. The red line is a correction made by Bose and Einstein called the Bose-Einstein statistics (jointly awarded credit for it, although the story goes that Bose got there first and they couldn't possibly allow an Indian to pip uncle Albert..therefore)
The graph represents Frequency (Y axis - the vertical one) v/s the Sampled Thing (X axis). The sampled thing could be anything from level of wealth to age to height of trees. What it means (and this may sound a bit philisophical) is that the maximum number of things are average or in the median-ish range. Bose corrected Rayleigh and said that there is always a peak at a point.
I believe that if you plot time of life on earth on the X axis and the frequency (ie the quantity) of humans living on the Y axis, Rayleigh's curve will apply. Just as I think it applied to dinosaurs, although their down curve may have been rather sudden if you accept the meteor theory. Just as it applies to the lions in Gir, who are now virtually gone. Just as it applied to dodos who ruled the roost in Madagascar until they were slaughtered by sailors. The curve always applies, whether or not the cause of the downfall of a species is natural or not.
What this means is that homosexuality as a phenomenon could actually be the natural cause bringing about the downslide of the human race. (You know- too many gay men and women around and not enough babies will be made...decline of the human race etc.)
When you're reading this, please don't think this theory is trash on the premise that there are 6 bn humans and they're not going to die out because we let homosexuals live freely. Remember, when I plot time on the X axis - it is going to be a bandwidth of 15-20 million years at least.
Therefore (and this is almost the conclusion), the operative question when we want to decide as a species whether or not to permit homosexuality is: where are we today as regards Rayleigh's curve? If we are still on the upswing, then in the interests of human rights and social well-being, we must permit homosexuals to live a life as free as ours. To allow them the peace of mind that should someone barge into their bedrooms, all that will happen is that they will be embarassed, not liable to be jailed.
On the other hand, if we find ourselves on the downward part of the curve, then the situation changes. Just like any other species, dominant or otherwise, only wants survive as long as possible, so also the homo sapien. If homosexuality is going to be the cause of our downfall, then we must clamp down on it to save ourselves from one of the possible causes of extinction. Males only attracted to males and females to females.
Imagine a planet-of-the-apes -esque position where heterosexuality is banned and the only way that the humans continue to spawn is through forced and regulated intercourse. (very weird...I know)
The point is that until we answer the question of where we stand, any decision taken by us is short-term. I don't say it's a wrong way to go about things, because you have to preserve yourself today. If it means saving n million lives a year from HIV/AIDS related deaths while taking the risk of possibly causing extinction 10 million years down the line, then I'l take my chances. But the point remains...in the overall scheme of things, we will never be able to answer the question without figuring out Rayleigh's curve.
Incidentally, in a remarkable comparison to the dinosaur era, a comet - Comet Swift-Tuttle is expected to hit earth on 14 August 2114 or 2117 or something in that region. The comet is expected to wipe out the majority of the planet...if I recall I think when they discovered it, it was larger than the moon.
Maybe the human race will also have a steep down curve.
'I think that I think; therefore, I think I am'
-Ambrose Bierce
Firstly, what is the current position? The Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act (ITPA) doesn't actually ban prostitution per se. It only bans one, trafficking (naturally) and two, solicitation. So in a nutshell, the two of us can have an agreement (a valid one too) where we decide that I will pay you Rs. n and in exchange you will have sex with me. What is not legal and will therefore be a void agreement (and illegal) is you coming to me and saying that you are willing to have sex with me for Rs. n.
A little on the basics of contract law for you non-law people:
In order for an agreement to be arrived at (legally), there has to be an acceptance and an offer. If the agreement then satisfies certain conditions (laid down in Section 10 of the Contract Act), it is a contract.
It is obviously a pretty fine line therefore, between solicitation and mere agreement and one which the courts invariably do not see. Also, the fact remains that without solicitation, it becomes almost impossible to actually come to an agreement. How do you and I telepathically communicate that (a) we want to have sex and (b) that I will pay you Rs. n to do so?
The only way out, of course, is if I ask you whether you are willing to have sex with me for Rs. n. If you say yes, then it is an agreement and the sex is not solicited by you. Unfortunately for the two of us, this sort of argument in court will have judges throwing the briefs and a couple of large books at your lawyer.
What legalisation of prostitution does, in a nutshell, is empower the CSWs (Commercial Sex Workers). As of now, they are thoroughly exploited by the police, sexually and otherwise. This is because the police can, at any point of time, simply say that they were soliciting, throw them before a court, which I'm sorry to say will never rule in the CSW's favour, not in India certainly.
In Calcutta's red light district (Sonagachi) they've had tremendous success in keeping the spread of HIV down by empowering the CSWs to say 'no' to customers who refuse to use condoms etc. They, to my best recollection, formed a sort of group/buddy system where CSWs would take care of each other directly rather than through the brothel owner (the 'madam'). The NGOs working there also have a huge number of awareness programmes, not just about health, but also legal awareness etc.
Once you make CS work legal and allow brothels to open up in select areas of cities and towns, you allow CSWs to regulate the terms of their employment. They would become employees of the brothel. They may even fall within the scope of 'workers' under the Industrial Disputes Act, which would give them wide ranging benefits, from compensation for work related diseases to a minimum wage etc etc.
How and whether at all this can actually be implemented at the ground level is quite another issue and remains one that can only be answered once the legal structure is in place.
Next is the issue of homosexuality.
I'm going to spare you all the normal BS about the issue, cos it's not worth your time to read it, nor is it worth mine to type it. In a nutshell, I agree with Mill's idea of liberty. Do what you want so long as it doesn't affect anyone else. There are two ways to approach the issue:
1. Socially - My take is let homosexual intercourse be legal and even legalise marriage at a later stage.
2. Biologically (ie looking at mankind as a species) - I came up with an interesting, yet possibly frivolous rationale while discussing this with a couple of friends in one of my less lucid moods.
Taking a start from Mill's POV, what is harmful to others? The question I had was: does homosexuality affect the human species as a whole? My hypothesis follows (forgive any inaccuracies in my maths...please correct me in your comments)
Rayleigh's curve is a bunch of mathematical equations which are broadly represented by this graph: (not to scale)
The black graph represents Rayleigh's original curve. The red line is a correction made by Bose and Einstein called the Bose-Einstein statistics (jointly awarded credit for it, although the story goes that Bose got there first and they couldn't possibly allow an Indian to pip uncle Albert..therefore)The graph represents Frequency (Y axis - the vertical one) v/s the Sampled Thing (X axis). The sampled thing could be anything from level of wealth to age to height of trees. What it means (and this may sound a bit philisophical) is that the maximum number of things are average or in the median-ish range. Bose corrected Rayleigh and said that there is always a peak at a point.
I believe that if you plot time of life on earth on the X axis and the frequency (ie the quantity) of humans living on the Y axis, Rayleigh's curve will apply. Just as I think it applied to dinosaurs, although their down curve may have been rather sudden if you accept the meteor theory. Just as it applies to the lions in Gir, who are now virtually gone. Just as it applied to dodos who ruled the roost in Madagascar until they were slaughtered by sailors. The curve always applies, whether or not the cause of the downfall of a species is natural or not.
What this means is that homosexuality as a phenomenon could actually be the natural cause bringing about the downslide of the human race. (You know- too many gay men and women around and not enough babies will be made...decline of the human race etc.)
When you're reading this, please don't think this theory is trash on the premise that there are 6 bn humans and they're not going to die out because we let homosexuals live freely. Remember, when I plot time on the X axis - it is going to be a bandwidth of 15-20 million years at least.
Therefore (and this is almost the conclusion), the operative question when we want to decide as a species whether or not to permit homosexuality is: where are we today as regards Rayleigh's curve? If we are still on the upswing, then in the interests of human rights and social well-being, we must permit homosexuals to live a life as free as ours. To allow them the peace of mind that should someone barge into their bedrooms, all that will happen is that they will be embarassed, not liable to be jailed.
On the other hand, if we find ourselves on the downward part of the curve, then the situation changes. Just like any other species, dominant or otherwise, only wants survive as long as possible, so also the homo sapien. If homosexuality is going to be the cause of our downfall, then we must clamp down on it to save ourselves from one of the possible causes of extinction. Males only attracted to males and females to females.
Imagine a planet-of-the-apes -esque position where heterosexuality is banned and the only way that the humans continue to spawn is through forced and regulated intercourse. (very weird...I know)
The point is that until we answer the question of where we stand, any decision taken by us is short-term. I don't say it's a wrong way to go about things, because you have to preserve yourself today. If it means saving n million lives a year from HIV/AIDS related deaths while taking the risk of possibly causing extinction 10 million years down the line, then I'l take my chances. But the point remains...in the overall scheme of things, we will never be able to answer the question without figuring out Rayleigh's curve.
Incidentally, in a remarkable comparison to the dinosaur era, a comet - Comet Swift-Tuttle is expected to hit earth on 14 August 2114 or 2117 or something in that region. The comet is expected to wipe out the majority of the planet...if I recall I think when they discovered it, it was larger than the moon.
Maybe the human race will also have a steep down curve.
'I think that I think; therefore, I think I am'
-Ambrose Bierce
Sunday 16 October 2005
The Mumbai University at its sadistic best
The University of Mumbai has done it again!! It has violated one of the most basic legal principles you will read. Let me explain:
Before the 2nd sem last year, the average percentage of people getting 1st classes in the 3rd year and further over the past 5-6 years was precisely 0%. Then in the 2nd sem last year (under a court order, I might add) they decided / had to change our exam pattern. Details of this is easy to come by - the objective section plus lowering 1st class to 60% etc.
The result: 35% 1st classes, 97% passes in the final year. Now this is too much for the guy who prints degree certificates, because suddenly he needs to use a new plate...one with "First Class" on it. ("How dare they???", he says of the Univ)
Anyway, in a first step to (kindly excuse the expression) screw us over, they give us a timetable as follows:
19th Nov - Admn Law
21st Nov - Family II
22nd Nov - Transfer of Prop & easements (TOP)
23rd Nov - Company Law
Now, TOP and Company are subjects which cant be revised in half a day even if I wanted to. In any case - this is ok...a challenge thrown to us...we are willing to take it up.
But then it seems the Univ pleaded its own incompetence. (incidentally my favourite answer to a question from the bench in a moot - "I plead Your Lordship's ignorance") It claimed (unofficially) that the time table was a mistake. Someone forgot to make sure that the KT exams weren't clashing with the regular ones.
KT papers are Keep Term papers aka papers you've ducked in previously. It is a concept which enables someone who's failed one year to go on to the next. (with some safeguards though!!) It's a concept many students bless. I am yet to take advantage of it and hope never to either.
So taking this as an excellent opportunity to pursue their policy to decrease the number of first classes and passes, the Univ preponed our exams by 5 days, less than a month before when it is now scheduled to start!!
The maxim which forbids this sort of thing in a court of law is nullus commudum capere potest de injuria sua propria - No man can take advantage of his own wrong.
This entire bit above may well sound like a pretty far fetched conspiracy theory, but trust me when I say that the Bombay Univ is one ofthe most student unfriendly Univ's you will ever see. Add to this the fact that there is no real students' organisation (Student Unions being banned in Maharashtra) and you have a Univ doing what it likes while a docile bunch of students writes letters to the TOI editor as the ultimate form of protest.
The Univ has had its share of backlash from GLC, at least. Being law students and many having successful lawyers and counsels as parents (some judges too!!), the Bombay HC has seen quite a few writs and PILs from us.
And yet they continue to torment us...are they just plain dumb or what?
Something has to be done about this sort of nonsense. But to be quite honest, most of us still in College are just a tad too scared of consequent victimisation in terms of acads (itcan happen) to do anything about it.
Two things therefore:
1. Any of you with bright ideas / know anyone with bright ideas to do something about this - please let me know and sign me up.
2. I didn't say any of the above - please don't quote me.
Before the 2nd sem last year, the average percentage of people getting 1st classes in the 3rd year and further over the past 5-6 years was precisely 0%. Then in the 2nd sem last year (under a court order, I might add) they decided / had to change our exam pattern. Details of this is easy to come by - the objective section plus lowering 1st class to 60% etc.
The result: 35% 1st classes, 97% passes in the final year. Now this is too much for the guy who prints degree certificates, because suddenly he needs to use a new plate...one with "First Class" on it. ("How dare they???", he says of the Univ)
Anyway, in a first step to (kindly excuse the expression) screw us over, they give us a timetable as follows:
19th Nov - Admn Law
21st Nov - Family II
22nd Nov - Transfer of Prop & easements (TOP)
23rd Nov - Company Law
Now, TOP and Company are subjects which cant be revised in half a day even if I wanted to. In any case - this is ok...a challenge thrown to us...we are willing to take it up.
But then it seems the Univ pleaded its own incompetence. (incidentally my favourite answer to a question from the bench in a moot - "I plead Your Lordship's ignorance") It claimed (unofficially) that the time table was a mistake. Someone forgot to make sure that the KT exams weren't clashing with the regular ones.
KT papers are Keep Term papers aka papers you've ducked in previously. It is a concept which enables someone who's failed one year to go on to the next. (with some safeguards though!!) It's a concept many students bless. I am yet to take advantage of it and hope never to either.
So taking this as an excellent opportunity to pursue their policy to decrease the number of first classes and passes, the Univ preponed our exams by 5 days, less than a month before when it is now scheduled to start!!
The maxim which forbids this sort of thing in a court of law is nullus commudum capere potest de injuria sua propria - No man can take advantage of his own wrong.
This entire bit above may well sound like a pretty far fetched conspiracy theory, but trust me when I say that the Bombay Univ is one ofthe most student unfriendly Univ's you will ever see. Add to this the fact that there is no real students' organisation (Student Unions being banned in Maharashtra) and you have a Univ doing what it likes while a docile bunch of students writes letters to the TOI editor as the ultimate form of protest.
The Univ has had its share of backlash from GLC, at least. Being law students and many having successful lawyers and counsels as parents (some judges too!!), the Bombay HC has seen quite a few writs and PILs from us.
And yet they continue to torment us...are they just plain dumb or what?
Something has to be done about this sort of nonsense. But to be quite honest, most of us still in College are just a tad too scared of consequent victimisation in terms of acads (itcan happen) to do anything about it.
Two things therefore:
1. Any of you with bright ideas / know anyone with bright ideas to do something about this - please let me know and sign me up.
2. I didn't say any of the above - please don't quote me.
Wednesday 12 October 2005
The Cap at the end of the Race
This blog will primarily be about an event that I purposely left out from my previous blog. The reason being I wanted to discuss it a bit more.
Before I actually get there...here's a photo of us performing at College. The funny guy in the middle looking dorky in formals, the Wimbledon cap and an electric guitar with a mic in his face is me. SM and AR flanking.
There's a story behind the formals - I actually carried my Kurt Cobain T-Shirt to put on and AR was very happy with it..but then it just looked really weird with the formal pants and shoes, so i decided against it. AR was very disappointed - almost pissed with me, particulary since he had his Nepalese skull cap on!!! SM's do was the bandana. I, of course, always have THE CAP.
Anyway - now to the event...I-Rock. It took place at some god-forsaken part of the city after being cancelled at Gateway a month earlier. The show was ok - the good covers, the bad originals, the growlers, the screamers and the mosh pit were all as usual.
The thing is I didn't madly enjoy myself (also due to the fact that no Nirvana or Maiden was played). I mean, I listen to loud music, usually like to start the day with Brave New World or Blood Brothers on my way to College. But there was something 'not quite right' about a bunch of adults/ nearly adults going to watch a bunch of guys performing and moving their heads up and down in synchrony. Don't get me wrong - give me a live performance over a recording any day.
The thing was - and I finally put my finger on it on the ride home - I didnt want to be there to listen, I wanted to be there to perform. It's really not that hard, and this is one of the reasons you see the college photo in this blog. With little or no experience amongst us and relatively little skill, the three of us didn't just put together 2 songs in two days - we also actually composed the violin's bits!!!
Given a bunch of guys who know how to go about their stuff, I'm pretty sure I can be up there- and it remains my target (my dream, perhaps) to do that one day. The electric will be in purusance of this...and maybe I'll be able to play rhythm while I sing.
All this profound thought aside - I need to know who reads this blog. Just the other day 'Muscle Girl' told me that 'Footnote Unaware' reads the blog. This is most disconcerting, for I am often very tempted to bitch on this blog. So if you are not among the usual suspects - kindly put your hand up and post a comment. The one thing that you'll may not comment about is the nicknames I give you.
Right - that's it.
All men dream, but unequally.
Those that dream at night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake the next day to find that their dreams were just vanity.
But those who dream during the day with their eyes wide open are dangerous men; they act out their dreams to make them reality.
-TE Lawrence
I wonder where I fit...
Before I actually get there...here's a photo of us performing at College. The funny guy in the middle looking dorky in formals, the Wimbledon cap and an electric guitar with a mic in his face is me. SM and AR flanking.
There's a story behind the formals - I actually carried my Kurt Cobain T-Shirt to put on and AR was very happy with it..but then it just looked really weird with the formal pants and shoes, so i decided against it. AR was very disappointed - almost pissed with me, particulary since he had his Nepalese skull cap on!!! SM's do was the bandana. I, of course, always have THE CAP.
Anyway - now to the event...I-Rock. It took place at some god-forsaken part of the city after being cancelled at Gateway a month earlier. The show was ok - the good covers, the bad originals, the growlers, the screamers and the mosh pit were all as usual.
The thing is I didn't madly enjoy myself (also due to the fact that no Nirvana or Maiden was played). I mean, I listen to loud music, usually like to start the day with Brave New World or Blood Brothers on my way to College. But there was something 'not quite right' about a bunch of adults/ nearly adults going to watch a bunch of guys performing and moving their heads up and down in synchrony. Don't get me wrong - give me a live performance over a recording any day.
The thing was - and I finally put my finger on it on the ride home - I didnt want to be there to listen, I wanted to be there to perform. It's really not that hard, and this is one of the reasons you see the college photo in this blog. With little or no experience amongst us and relatively little skill, the three of us didn't just put together 2 songs in two days - we also actually composed the violin's bits!!!
Given a bunch of guys who know how to go about their stuff, I'm pretty sure I can be up there- and it remains my target (my dream, perhaps) to do that one day. The electric will be in purusance of this...and maybe I'll be able to play rhythm while I sing.
All this profound thought aside - I need to know who reads this blog. Just the other day 'Muscle Girl' told me that 'Footnote Unaware' reads the blog. This is most disconcerting, for I am often very tempted to bitch on this blog. So if you are not among the usual suspects - kindly put your hand up and post a comment. The one thing that you'll may not comment about is the nicknames I give you.
Right - that's it.
All men dream, but unequally.
Those that dream at night in the dusty recesses of their minds awake the next day to find that their dreams were just vanity.
But those who dream during the day with their eyes wide open are dangerous men; they act out their dreams to make them reality.
-TE Lawrence
I wonder where I fit...
Sunday 9 October 2005
Happenings, yet no roll
It's been a long long time since my last blog. The reason why you'll start seeing more blogs now is that I'm into study mode - so basically, anything to get away from it. Life has been madly uninteresting over the past few weeks. Not that I'm complaining though. Events in my life:
This was taken on a morning walk in Munnar last December. That's a sprinkler system working on a tea estate.
Anyway - shall sign off before I ramble.
-George Eliot, perhaps describing my anti. ;))
- Won another 2nd place. This time in an elocution... "is Bombay sitting on a ticking time bomb"
- Did my grand moot. After implementing a system that puts people through 3 rounds to get a national, I decided I'd like to give it a go. Did the 1st two rounds - a really sidey criminal brief. When I say sidey, I mean it was bad! Anyone reading this who knows the problem setter, you can tell him - I think he already knows this. Decided not to do the 3r round and get a national - because I really just dont feel like mooting.
- Lost an essay competition - MR and I went to check results and I 'won' a consolation prize. "Theosophy" by Annie Besant - 1997 edn. I forgot to take it away from MR when I dropped her home and it seems she lasted all of 5 pages.
- Started studying...details unimportant
- Cleaned up my table an hour before this blog
- Won an 'acceptance' at my first try at the PSI monthly comp. Here's the photo that got accepted:
This was taken on a morning walk in Munnar last December. That's a sprinkler system working on a tea estate.
- Finished reading Media Control by Chomsky. Just a very understood sort of book. No thought really. Rating 2/5
- Laughed my head off at the following:
- Salman Rushdie and Sunita Narain being nominated among the 100 greatest thinkers of today
- IAEA being given the Nobel Peace. (Bob Geldof would have been a better option. Also Bono remains the perennial nominee. If you ask me - Bill Gates had a better chance than the IAEA, despite not being nominated.
- Became the Jt. Sec of the Bazm-e-Urdu. A defunct committee in College. When asked by the prof-in-charge to join, I very honestly said "Ma'am, I cant speak Hindi...Urdu????". Anyway there was some bash -which I conveniently avoided.
- Virtually absolved myself of all college duties - now that the Law Review has gone into print.
- Trashed the quality of GLC profs in my vote of thanks after YV Chandrachud's lecture (with a good strong dose of sarcasm naturally). I am most kicked about it. As one person giving me a review said - "I doubt anyone would have tried or pulled that off". The unfortunate part was the students were relatively quiet, only smiling away. The profs in the 1st row went mad...beaming and exchanging looks. I don't know if they got it and were smiling in embarassment or are so thick that they actually thought it was a compliment.
Anyway - shall sign off before I ramble.
"He was like a cock who thought the sun had risen to hear him crow"
-George Eliot, perhaps describing my anti. ;))
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
