Pearls

Sometimes, you are shown something in a whole new light - aspects you never knew existed that are revealed. Here are some such pearls:

***
En route to Chicago, I saw this on the back of a shiny milk truck:

"Got Milk. Got Cookies?"

Why do I find this so funny?

***
Back home, I'm watching the Red Green show and here's a gem from the show:

"Out of sight is out of mind - doesn't mean if you have to wear spectacles, you have gone crazy."

***
[If you] "Dream Big, you might never wake up!"

Attributed to Snoop Dogg

***
Today's Cartoon (4/16/06) from Randy Glasbergen:

"If leaves can turn orange for Halloween, why can't they turn pink and purple for Easter?"

Tharoor

One reason I read others' blogs is because it reveals some published content on the Internet that the usual browsing doesn't. Jewels.

I happened to stop by http://tilotamma.blogspot.com/ and found a reference to http://www.hinduonnet.com/2001/07/08/stories/13080675.htm and happened to comment on it. I suspect Tilo had some reasons behind taking the post off, but hey, sometimes even I reach the levels of vanity reserved for the Stephanians (Is that the right word?) of this world.
So, deciding to republish just my comment alone:

I found the few R. K. Narayan's works that I have read interesting and absorbing. The issues of style that form a big part of Tharoor's comments might be justified, might not be. I don't care. Since I find the content of Narayan's works to be powerful.

Regarding Tharoor's somewhat acerbic words, I have this to say: All his works are very self-aware. His "anti-tribute", as Tilo called it, is intended to shock and take you aback and it looks like it had achieved the desired effect - at least on one reader and most probably on many many Indian readers.

Of course, once you are aware of such an intention, you can always refuse to play any part in it. :)

I am not saying Tharoor is wrong. I am just saying Tharoor probably thinks himself to be so objective that he would be prepared to write an equally caustic obituary for himself to show that he is not beyond himself and therein lies his pitfall.

I realize this is the second post on objectivity - a topic that's growing old within the confines of this blog.

QOTD Today

(ah - already off ypur blogroll I see...)

Tendulkar

Much has been written about Sachin Tendulkar. He has been placed on a pedestal as the "Genius" and as the "Little Master" by the Indian cricket fans for more than a decade now. I am not a fan nor am I posting this in criticism of him.

I am reacting based on a news article that said that he was booed all the way back from the field at Wankhede stadium.

http://www.hindu.com/2006/03/21/stories/2006032110371800.htm

Nirmal Shekar in this article comes to the conclusion that "Sportslovers have lost the capacity to look at the larger picture ..."

Here's my somewhat different view of the larger picture:

While the booing is inexcusable, it is but a natural adjustment considering how high Indian sports fans had placed Sachin. The reaction of the crowd doesn't say much about Sachin, it says how big a bubble they had blown around him and now that it burst in their faces, they're but angry.

3 good things about Sachin -
1. He has played some spectacular innings - spectacular not just in its execution and endless entertainment value to the Indian viewer, but also in its importance to his career
2. He carries himself as a gentleman
3. He has more years in him as a player

The above 3 are only tangentially helpful to the Indian team and this is where I think he should do better.

Nirmal in his article says:
"The point is, Tendulkar never promised any of us a masterly century in every innings that he might get to play. We were the ones who set that impossible goal for the little man. That he has failed to meet that unrealistic goal is no sheen off his greatness; it merely throws light on our own foolishness. "

I (and I speak only for myself here) have never expected Sachin to score a century in every match. When he walks to the crease, I always hope that I would see the genius within him in action, but have never expected it as a matter of right or should I say demanded it. But in the few matches that I have seen him play lately, he seems listless and returns from the crease with many a times, a single digit score. This too is inexcusable, especially when the team's coach says that every member of the team earns his place in the team by performing well. If Sachin is ready to play, why does everybody assume he should be in every match India plays. Let him play in a few. Let him sit out a few. Let him perform (by this I don't mean a masterful century, I just mean a signifcant contribution towards the team - batting, bowling or fielding) and them take him on more frequently. If Ganguly can be dropped (and rightly so), then Sachin too should face this prospect.

Sachin has inspired more than just a few generations - starting from my grandfather - an avid armchair cricket fan to kids who are in the middle school now. And in this way he has been precious.

But there comes a time as in the case with the Concorde (the plane that cemented a place for itself in the history books by showing how fast Man could fly), when Man needs to look to the future and see who or what will be the star in the next chapter in history. May be the Concorde isn't done yet, may be it is.


QOTD

"[Sprezzatura ("unstudied nonchalance"):] Employ in everything a certain casualness which conceals art and creates the impression that what is done and said is accomplished without effort and without its being thought about. It is from this , in my opinion, that grace largely derives."
-- Baldassare Castiglione, The Book of the Courtier, 1528