The ongoing financial crisis in US gives an oppertunity to leanback and think twice before allowing indescriminate de regulation of financial sector. The nature of banking is not as it was before globalisation. With the world interlinked through the web of financial institutions, the nature of banking organs also changed forever. There are a lot of new forms of operations came in to existence. One of such is Investment banks.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
Friday, September 5, 2008
Chiranjeevi, Left, TDP in AP
Coming elections a watershed for AP
Undoubtedly the forthcoming general as well as assembly elections in Andhra Pradesh are going to be a watershed in the political history of the state. Andhra Pradesh once again witnessed political upsurge. Unlike in any other part of the country the state witnessed emergence of two new political outfits. One by TDP splinter group leader Devendar Gaud and the other one lead by famous film star Chiranjeevi. The basic difference between two from people’s perspective is only that Gaud has been seen by the people in his political career, in the party and also in the government where as Chiranjeevi’s political personification is not know so far. To be presise Chiranjeevi is untested and Gaud is tested as politician.
We need to look at in to the context of these two emergences. Gaud deserted his parental party on the issue of Telangana. Chiranjeev does not have any such ground except his zeal to represent and be represented by the people. In that sense Gaud is having limited area of operation which is geographically confined where as Chiranjeevi is having the whole state as his area of operation. Gaud has limited sphere of influence and Chiranjeevi is having larger sphere of influence. The another aspect to keep in mind is that Gaud, being a tested political persona, is having his tested base of supporters, issue, team though he is not dwelling in to a single point agenda where as Chiranjeevi’s case is otherwise. As he himself, his team, issues of priority, political skills, ideology, programme of action, mainly the perceived mass base are still to be tested.
To put in on a wider canvass we have to recognise one more fact. The state witnessed over the last two decades a serious, prolonged, militant mass movements based on issues such as world bank, caste discrimination, housing problem and off course corruption. All these movements were spearheaded by the Left in the state under the leadership of CPI(M). Though these movements are not preceded by general economic crises of late 70s, these movements also added to the political churning process that is underway. If we look at the last 3 decades of political landscape, earlier single party domination ended with the establishment of two party system as in the case of Tamilnadu. The people who tired off experiencing the single party domination for at least 30 years overwhelmed by the presence of Telugu Desam Party in early 80’s. But the last 30 years experience particularly of the current generation is not satisfied with the performance of both TDP and Cong. Though the Cong in the state has witnessed generational change of leadership, there is no change of policy direction. Telugu Desam also failed to prove itself as it comes to overseeing development of the state which was resulted in drubbing of TDP in the last elections.
Currently except the Left in the state which lead prolonged struggles, both TDP and Cong are facing credibility deficiency. Even after five years as principle opposition party, TDP could not generate the lost confidence. Instead of rethinking over the party’s priorities, TDP and Chandra Babu Naidu sat in confidence banking on the anti incumbency voting. Due to several administrative steps initiated by Congress government in the state, the level of resentment in the rural areas is not as it is in the urban areas. In urban areas also the resentment lacks its fierceness. Here lies the failure of principle opposition party in chanellising the resentment. The main reason for this failure is that the party could not gain confidence even after four and half years of its rule.
In this context we need to gauge the tactical moves of TDP. There is a turn around on the issue of forging electoral ties that too particularly with CPI(M) in this decade. If we remember while facing the assembly elections in 1997 Chandra Babu Naidu was riding on clouds. He fought on his own. By that time his new uncharted path of development has not paid dividends. So people overwhelmingly supported him by refusing congress. Since then his style of political operation had been completely changed. Those were the days either in Delhi, of in Hyderabad or in Washington, whatever TDP supreme says that used to be considered as a revelation ! With that credited charishma as an intellectual, he used to coin new slogans day by day. One such slogan is that “ herein after there are no isms except tourism” is meant to kidding the Left in India. I shall share with you one such incident where he was beaming with confidence about the re-election. While addressing a visiting journalists team from Delhi, in 2002, at his residence Babu brought an interesting comparison of Bengal, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh where in he said that in all these states there is no effective political opponent who can match with the ruling party at that time. And also he analysed that the principle opposition parties in respective states failed to put forward a viable policy alternatives ! He used to boost up his cadre by saying that he will rule like CPI(M) in Bengal uninterruptedly. This shows that he basically banked on the failure of opposition to come back to power but not on his competency as ruler. With that style of functioning, and attitude he de-linked himself and also his party from the grass roots. People won’t take too long to prove that neither his nor his compatriot Laalu’s policies are so viable. By now he should have realised what was and is the difference between Bengal and Andhra Pradesh or Jyoti Basu and him hopefully. After exactly 10 years, in an eleventh year he is crawling to join hands with CPI(M) to re-establish his links with grass roots and also to fill the credibility gap that he generated during his tenure.
The direction of YS Rajasekar Reddy lead Congress government is also more are less in the same direction. He is also now running in to clouds about the failure of TDP in acting in the interests of people as principle opposition party. Over these all four years TDP could not able to understand what exactly went wrong for it in the last elections. So he could not think over his policies except for the media consumption. Exactly in this situation Chiranjeevi came on to scene hoping to en-cash this failure of principle opposition party role. After two weeks of his launching the party, PRP representatives in Hyderabad declared that they need not to enter in to any electoral understandings to defeat Congress. In movies directors used to be behind the screen. Here also the main architect of PRP, Allu Aravind is behind the screen, true to his role as producer / director. But filming is different from politics. In film industry though the fans are not known to have aspirations beyond a point. But in politics, where each and every step relates to the daily public life, people’s aspirations, wants, beliefs are linked to their livelihood problems. Chiranjeevi could not provide any viable policy alternative to his credit. He is having fans linked mass base. The time will prove whether he will be able to impact by transforming this fans linked mass base in to a credible political base from where he has to re-launch himself as a serious contender for the power in the next elections.
As of now the situation looks like a multiparty contest in Telangana and triangular contest in other parts of the state. This is the first time the state is witnessing such a multiple contests across the state. This is the reason why I felt the next elections will be watershed in states political landscape.
Undoubtedly the forthcoming general as well as assembly elections in Andhra Pradesh are going to be a watershed in the political history of the state. Andhra Pradesh once again witnessed political upsurge. Unlike in any other part of the country the state witnessed emergence of two new political outfits. One by TDP splinter group leader Devendar Gaud and the other one lead by famous film star Chiranjeevi. The basic difference between two from people’s perspective is only that Gaud has been seen by the people in his political career, in the party and also in the government where as Chiranjeevi’s political personification is not know so far. To be presise Chiranjeevi is untested and Gaud is tested as politician.
We need to look at in to the context of these two emergences. Gaud deserted his parental party on the issue of Telangana. Chiranjeev does not have any such ground except his zeal to represent and be represented by the people. In that sense Gaud is having limited area of operation which is geographically confined where as Chiranjeevi is having the whole state as his area of operation. Gaud has limited sphere of influence and Chiranjeevi is having larger sphere of influence. The another aspect to keep in mind is that Gaud, being a tested political persona, is having his tested base of supporters, issue, team though he is not dwelling in to a single point agenda where as Chiranjeevi’s case is otherwise. As he himself, his team, issues of priority, political skills, ideology, programme of action, mainly the perceived mass base are still to be tested.
To put in on a wider canvass we have to recognise one more fact. The state witnessed over the last two decades a serious, prolonged, militant mass movements based on issues such as world bank, caste discrimination, housing problem and off course corruption. All these movements were spearheaded by the Left in the state under the leadership of CPI(M). Though these movements are not preceded by general economic crises of late 70s, these movements also added to the political churning process that is underway. If we look at the last 3 decades of political landscape, earlier single party domination ended with the establishment of two party system as in the case of Tamilnadu. The people who tired off experiencing the single party domination for at least 30 years overwhelmed by the presence of Telugu Desam Party in early 80’s. But the last 30 years experience particularly of the current generation is not satisfied with the performance of both TDP and Cong. Though the Cong in the state has witnessed generational change of leadership, there is no change of policy direction. Telugu Desam also failed to prove itself as it comes to overseeing development of the state which was resulted in drubbing of TDP in the last elections.
Currently except the Left in the state which lead prolonged struggles, both TDP and Cong are facing credibility deficiency. Even after five years as principle opposition party, TDP could not generate the lost confidence. Instead of rethinking over the party’s priorities, TDP and Chandra Babu Naidu sat in confidence banking on the anti incumbency voting. Due to several administrative steps initiated by Congress government in the state, the level of resentment in the rural areas is not as it is in the urban areas. In urban areas also the resentment lacks its fierceness. Here lies the failure of principle opposition party in chanellising the resentment. The main reason for this failure is that the party could not gain confidence even after four and half years of its rule.
In this context we need to gauge the tactical moves of TDP. There is a turn around on the issue of forging electoral ties that too particularly with CPI(M) in this decade. If we remember while facing the assembly elections in 1997 Chandra Babu Naidu was riding on clouds. He fought on his own. By that time his new uncharted path of development has not paid dividends. So people overwhelmingly supported him by refusing congress. Since then his style of political operation had been completely changed. Those were the days either in Delhi, of in Hyderabad or in Washington, whatever TDP supreme says that used to be considered as a revelation ! With that credited charishma as an intellectual, he used to coin new slogans day by day. One such slogan is that “ herein after there are no isms except tourism” is meant to kidding the Left in India. I shall share with you one such incident where he was beaming with confidence about the re-election. While addressing a visiting journalists team from Delhi, in 2002, at his residence Babu brought an interesting comparison of Bengal, Bihar and Andhra Pradesh where in he said that in all these states there is no effective political opponent who can match with the ruling party at that time. And also he analysed that the principle opposition parties in respective states failed to put forward a viable policy alternatives ! He used to boost up his cadre by saying that he will rule like CPI(M) in Bengal uninterruptedly. This shows that he basically banked on the failure of opposition to come back to power but not on his competency as ruler. With that style of functioning, and attitude he de-linked himself and also his party from the grass roots. People won’t take too long to prove that neither his nor his compatriot Laalu’s policies are so viable. By now he should have realised what was and is the difference between Bengal and Andhra Pradesh or Jyoti Basu and him hopefully. After exactly 10 years, in an eleventh year he is crawling to join hands with CPI(M) to re-establish his links with grass roots and also to fill the credibility gap that he generated during his tenure.
The direction of YS Rajasekar Reddy lead Congress government is also more are less in the same direction. He is also now running in to clouds about the failure of TDP in acting in the interests of people as principle opposition party. Over these all four years TDP could not able to understand what exactly went wrong for it in the last elections. So he could not think over his policies except for the media consumption. Exactly in this situation Chiranjeevi came on to scene hoping to en-cash this failure of principle opposition party role. After two weeks of his launching the party, PRP representatives in Hyderabad declared that they need not to enter in to any electoral understandings to defeat Congress. In movies directors used to be behind the screen. Here also the main architect of PRP, Allu Aravind is behind the screen, true to his role as producer / director. But filming is different from politics. In film industry though the fans are not known to have aspirations beyond a point. But in politics, where each and every step relates to the daily public life, people’s aspirations, wants, beliefs are linked to their livelihood problems. Chiranjeevi could not provide any viable policy alternative to his credit. He is having fans linked mass base. The time will prove whether he will be able to impact by transforming this fans linked mass base in to a credible political base from where he has to re-launch himself as a serious contender for the power in the next elections.
As of now the situation looks like a multiparty contest in Telangana and triangular contest in other parts of the state. This is the first time the state is witnessing such a multiple contests across the state. This is the reason why I felt the next elections will be watershed in states political landscape.
Thursday, September 4, 2008
From South Dakota of USA to Araku Valley of Andhra
Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee: The Story behind the Unification of USA
The story of “Battle of Wounded Knee Creek” is very interesting and also we can draw several lessons from that about United States of America (USA). By now, USA has established itself as the second biggest democracy in the world but the establishment of USA itself has a major historical crunch in which we need to dwell into in order to understand its historical claims in reality.
There are so many stories, histories written about how the George Washington army ruthlessly annexed tribal lands in Northern American continent in its way to the formation of USA. As social science students at our high school we were told that there are three great revolutions in the world history. They are: Bloodless revolution of England, American Revolution, and French Revolution. All of them are part of evolution of modern democratic set up, we were told. And also were taught of the greatness of George Washington who commanded over the army of US in its liberation struggle. But there are two parts of US liberation struggle.
The first part is the struggle the up coming US nobility in the 13 Colonies on the Atlantic seaboard of North America engaged with Great Britain and won independence to become United States of America. The world history threw heavy light on this development and marked it as a watershed in the evolution of modern democracy.
The second part comes from 1783 to 1890, when the newly formed USA gradually annexed the tribal states in its expansionist scheme to put place the USA what we are seeking today. The second part of the story of unification of America was not debated much in comparison to its first part.
I think, in the year 2000 when I was working as a social activist in Hyderabad I had a discussion with Com. Punyavati who happened at that time State Secretary of All India Democratic Women’s Association. Then I argued that USA does not have its own history, culture as we, and the other countries of eastern hemisphere have. Their so called culture is evolved only in about a century till now. In its emergence the behavior of USA towards its native tribal states and population gives an understanding about its nature. Since then, I kept on looking for new material, books which places my arguments in a sophisticated, structured manner. Finally I found in the book Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee, something that I was exactly looking for. This is also a part of history of Civil War that threatened newly emerging American nation. This was is in between the already existing tribal nations and newly emerging American nation.
This not only proves my assumption that USA emerged only after brutal annexation of tribal people who are known as Red Indian tribes. For the outer world, the Western Sociology introduces Red Indians as a single tribe where as that was the nomenclature got significance after the Columbus’s discovery of American continent. Like in today’s India, in America also, there number of tribes such as Sioux, about which the present book deals.
This tribal nation enters in to an agreement called Fort Laramie Treaty 1868 there by shedding some land for the white settlements and reserving some land for the purpose of local tribal population’s utilization such as hunting, food collection as it happened to be a forest till that time. This is where for the first time I heard about the Geographical Reservation Policy, which might be a prelude to the reservation polices and affirmative actions which we have been experiencing in the 20th century.
The whole story revolves around how the US Congress and the local white senator acted in a deceitful manner while expanding the white settlements by violating the treaty they entered in to with the South Dakotan tribal nation Sioux. That means till the 19th century US is experiencing the tribal lives where hunting and other primary production modes are in operation and main forms of livelihood! By 19th century India has emerged in to a single nation physically, psychologically and also politically under the English colonialism.
This annexation of South Dakota also is about the gold rush which was found it those areas in 6th decade of 9th century. This gold rush prompted white rulers to expand the white settlements to these areas in order to justify the planned exploitation of gold mines. Now though it may be a disproportionate comparison, I will compare the Sioux annexation by US with the industrialization of Araku Valley in Andhra Pradesh. In Araku to explore the Bauxite for industrial purpose, the government recently sanctioned environmental clearance for a joint venture for exploiting the Bauxite in Eastern Ghats which are famed for their natural beauty. This approval will also as in the case of Sioux tribe destroy the natural livelihood options of local tribal people. At least the imperial USA implemented some geographical reservation, though that could not avoid the war with the local tribes, the modern democratic governments of Andhra Pradesh and India are not providing for the same. The existing environmental laws mandate the government to provide alternative land (as in the case of Dakota) for the rehabilitation of those displaced due to this project. The governments are not coming forward to implement their own laws. Even though they may provide geographical reservation, they can explicate the natural settings of Araku Valley, thus the industrialist, capitalist greed paving way for the annexation of natural settings some times for its settlements and for some times for its profit !
Finally, perhaps as of US expertise in establishing white settlements (that lead to the emergence of USA as a modern nation), it is helping, guiding and also directing all necessary means to expand the Jewish settlements in Palestine lands where by destroying the Palestine Arabs as a nation as they had done with in the case of Red Indian Tribes !!!
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Hector Could have Saved Troy
Let them say I walked with giants
Not to go in to chronological order of a tale that has more than 3000 years in its behind, the war of Troy has evoked certain observations when I looked at it. When I happened to be a student of English Literature in my graduation, we had a brief introduction of war of Troy as part of beginnings of modern drama, Homer as father of modern drama. Iliad and Odyssey are two lengthy poetic narrations by Homer who believed to live around 9th Century of BC in Greek. We were told that Iliad is about the war that lead to the fall of Troy and Odyssey is about the return journey of Agamemnon who lead the Greeks in that war and the life after Troy.
After a long gap of say about 15 years I am able to lay my hands on to the subject again. What surprised me is that the capacity of a 3000 years old story to ignite fresh thoughts about the persons and personalities apart from what had happened, why it was like so ! May be that is the beauty of an epic like Ramayana and Mahabharata, what we have had. At least in the case of Ramayana we had a writing figure Valmiki, though we can’t ascertain his authenticity. But in the case of Mahabharata, the writer, Vyasa still looks at least for me as a fictitious persona.
Coming back to the original story, the mythological narration can be found at http://www.royalty.nu/legends/Troy.html. I wish to just take some aspects only basically which surrounds the characters of Hector and Achilles, Priam, the king of Troy.
Hector : Tactically right
Eldest son of Praim ( king of Troy) a loyal country man and an effective commander who has an eye on the activities of Paris, his own brother who became so close to Helen, the wife of Menelaus, the Greek king Agamemnon’s brother. After the ceremony ( read the above link) night before Paris and his brother moves to Troy meets Helen and seduces her and also impresses her to elope with him to Troy where they can live a loving and peaceful life. Helen follows Paris directions and enters in to the ship that sailed to Troy in guise. On sea, Paris informs the same to Hector who becomes angry and also fears consequences. As soon as they arrives in Troy the picture unfolds in the Priam’s court where they decided even to fight for Paris’s love. In the court Hector warns the consequences and proposes to hand over Helen back to Menelaus and enter in to treaty to save the people and the country from the perils of war. But nobody hears as the Chief Priest also sides with Priam and encourages war. Through out this episod the Priam’s priest ill advices the rulers of Troy including taking the wooden horse wherein the Trojans sealed themselves in to city. Hector argues well having the tactical understanding after overseeing the war with Greeks for some years. He finds that the advances so far made by Troy military is due to divisions in the Agamemnon’s allies banking on the sea. For some time Achilles won’t take part in the war with his men. With out Achilles and his men, the Greek soldiers lost morale and starts running. Following the ill advise from chief priest and some other allies of small tribes Priam enters in to a deadly battle. One more aspect of Hector also I like. He is not only loyal to his people and a good commander. He is also upholds the moral principles. After killing Achilles’ friend thinking that he was Achilles, Hector confesses the same and gets himself ready to face the consequences lonely. He warns his wife to escape before the Greek army plunders city. In one on one fight Hector braves Achilles and dies in front of Troy city gates while his whole court is overlooking . He also refuses his archery to slew arches at Achilles while he roads on his chariot. After going through the personality of Hector one can sum up his character as morally right.
Achilles : The brave boy who always sides with the Greek in the troublesome period of Greek’s civilisation at his early stage secures en number of victories including the famous one of Troy. He and Agamemnon are completely opposite. Due to stiff differences with Agamemnon over Agamemnon’s wish to have Bresis, the Troy’s princes, Achilles asks his men not to take part in war for some years. Exactly those are the years when the Troy recorded some advances. After killing Hector, Achilles asks Greek army to return to the sea. Bresis tries her best to see that Achilles not to return to war filed. But with an ambition of conquering Troy, Agamemnon does not agrees for that. History has two opinions on the events that followed Hector’s death. Some says including Homeric verses that Greek army was vanished due to the spread of plague. Some says that after certain sections of Greek army vanishes, realising the problem Agamemnon and Achilles decides to make a giant size wooden horse by destroying the boats and shield themselves from plague. After some time Priam looks at the empty beaches where the wooden horse stands alone. The wooden horse enters in to Troy city and the men of Greek comes out on night and lit fire and sacks everyone who comes across and steels what ever they found worth including the destruction of the famous Apollo, the sun god’s temple.
Priam : Who happened to be unifier of Troy rule by conquering several tribal chiefs establishes well knit society in Troy. His only weakness is to follow the advices of his priest. Thus he paves way for the destruction of the empire which he built.
Menelaus and Agamemnon : Are zealous of Hector and Troy kingdom and waits for an opportunity. Helen’s elopement with Paris gives them opportunity to siege the Troy, which finally ends by doing so after a decade of war.
One more important thing we can find here is the culture of victorious army looking the temples for treasures. Thus we need not to find the BJP’s arguments in India about the Muslims rulers destroying hindu temples, a valid one. This phenomenon can be seen all along the history in spite of continental differences.
Similarities between Mahabarata and War of Troy : There are so many commonalities in both these wars. Both, if at all they had happened, happened in the late Bronze Age of human civilisation. The narrations of both the Homer and Vyasa are of same in nature. The disputes arises though over the retention and expansion of empires, reaches final stage over the question of Women ! Like in Mahabarata, in War of Troy also diplomacy precedes the war. Like in Mahabarata, both sides mobilises support of tribal chiefs of that time in and from the surrounding areas. Only difference is that war of Troy happens on the banks of Aegean Sea where as Mahabarata was basically land based war. In war of Troy we can’t find the usage of Elephants in war where as in Mahabarata we do. In both cases the so called Gods oversees the war with enormous interests while some taking either sides and others staying as on lookers.
What ever it may about the reality of these wars, we can say that they had happened, if at all they were, at a time when the role of women started being confined from principle owner of home to subordinate owner of home. In anthropological studies this is the period where we can see the evolution of human civilisation from the stage of women dominated to male dominated one, which is still surviving till today !
The dramatic dialogue Achilles tells to Bresis few minutes before his death is that “ Let them say I walked with giants “. This has in his minds the heated debates he enters in to with Agamemnon after initial victories over Troy where Agamemnon thunders “ History will remember Kings not foot soldiers”
What ever may history says, we can say that the age of Troy, and Indraprastha are gigantic steps in the evolution of human civilisation. Hence we can accept that Achilles’ saying by interpreting that all the characters of war of Troy are walked with giants !
Not to go in to chronological order of a tale that has more than 3000 years in its behind, the war of Troy has evoked certain observations when I looked at it. When I happened to be a student of English Literature in my graduation, we had a brief introduction of war of Troy as part of beginnings of modern drama, Homer as father of modern drama. Iliad and Odyssey are two lengthy poetic narrations by Homer who believed to live around 9th Century of BC in Greek. We were told that Iliad is about the war that lead to the fall of Troy and Odyssey is about the return journey of Agamemnon who lead the Greeks in that war and the life after Troy.
After a long gap of say about 15 years I am able to lay my hands on to the subject again. What surprised me is that the capacity of a 3000 years old story to ignite fresh thoughts about the persons and personalities apart from what had happened, why it was like so ! May be that is the beauty of an epic like Ramayana and Mahabharata, what we have had. At least in the case of Ramayana we had a writing figure Valmiki, though we can’t ascertain his authenticity. But in the case of Mahabharata, the writer, Vyasa still looks at least for me as a fictitious persona.
Coming back to the original story, the mythological narration can be found at http://www.royalty.nu/legends/Troy.html. I wish to just take some aspects only basically which surrounds the characters of Hector and Achilles, Priam, the king of Troy.
Hector : Tactically right
Eldest son of Praim ( king of Troy) a loyal country man and an effective commander who has an eye on the activities of Paris, his own brother who became so close to Helen, the wife of Menelaus, the Greek king Agamemnon’s brother. After the ceremony ( read the above link) night before Paris and his brother moves to Troy meets Helen and seduces her and also impresses her to elope with him to Troy where they can live a loving and peaceful life. Helen follows Paris directions and enters in to the ship that sailed to Troy in guise. On sea, Paris informs the same to Hector who becomes angry and also fears consequences. As soon as they arrives in Troy the picture unfolds in the Priam’s court where they decided even to fight for Paris’s love. In the court Hector warns the consequences and proposes to hand over Helen back to Menelaus and enter in to treaty to save the people and the country from the perils of war. But nobody hears as the Chief Priest also sides with Priam and encourages war. Through out this episod the Priam’s priest ill advices the rulers of Troy including taking the wooden horse wherein the Trojans sealed themselves in to city. Hector argues well having the tactical understanding after overseeing the war with Greeks for some years. He finds that the advances so far made by Troy military is due to divisions in the Agamemnon’s allies banking on the sea. For some time Achilles won’t take part in the war with his men. With out Achilles and his men, the Greek soldiers lost morale and starts running. Following the ill advise from chief priest and some other allies of small tribes Priam enters in to a deadly battle. One more aspect of Hector also I like. He is not only loyal to his people and a good commander. He is also upholds the moral principles. After killing Achilles’ friend thinking that he was Achilles, Hector confesses the same and gets himself ready to face the consequences lonely. He warns his wife to escape before the Greek army plunders city. In one on one fight Hector braves Achilles and dies in front of Troy city gates while his whole court is overlooking . He also refuses his archery to slew arches at Achilles while he roads on his chariot. After going through the personality of Hector one can sum up his character as morally right.
Achilles : The brave boy who always sides with the Greek in the troublesome period of Greek’s civilisation at his early stage secures en number of victories including the famous one of Troy. He and Agamemnon are completely opposite. Due to stiff differences with Agamemnon over Agamemnon’s wish to have Bresis, the Troy’s princes, Achilles asks his men not to take part in war for some years. Exactly those are the years when the Troy recorded some advances. After killing Hector, Achilles asks Greek army to return to the sea. Bresis tries her best to see that Achilles not to return to war filed. But with an ambition of conquering Troy, Agamemnon does not agrees for that. History has two opinions on the events that followed Hector’s death. Some says including Homeric verses that Greek army was vanished due to the spread of plague. Some says that after certain sections of Greek army vanishes, realising the problem Agamemnon and Achilles decides to make a giant size wooden horse by destroying the boats and shield themselves from plague. After some time Priam looks at the empty beaches where the wooden horse stands alone. The wooden horse enters in to Troy city and the men of Greek comes out on night and lit fire and sacks everyone who comes across and steels what ever they found worth including the destruction of the famous Apollo, the sun god’s temple.
Priam : Who happened to be unifier of Troy rule by conquering several tribal chiefs establishes well knit society in Troy. His only weakness is to follow the advices of his priest. Thus he paves way for the destruction of the empire which he built.
Menelaus and Agamemnon : Are zealous of Hector and Troy kingdom and waits for an opportunity. Helen’s elopement with Paris gives them opportunity to siege the Troy, which finally ends by doing so after a decade of war.
One more important thing we can find here is the culture of victorious army looking the temples for treasures. Thus we need not to find the BJP’s arguments in India about the Muslims rulers destroying hindu temples, a valid one. This phenomenon can be seen all along the history in spite of continental differences.
Similarities between Mahabarata and War of Troy : There are so many commonalities in both these wars. Both, if at all they had happened, happened in the late Bronze Age of human civilisation. The narrations of both the Homer and Vyasa are of same in nature. The disputes arises though over the retention and expansion of empires, reaches final stage over the question of Women ! Like in Mahabarata, in War of Troy also diplomacy precedes the war. Like in Mahabarata, both sides mobilises support of tribal chiefs of that time in and from the surrounding areas. Only difference is that war of Troy happens on the banks of Aegean Sea where as Mahabarata was basically land based war. In war of Troy we can’t find the usage of Elephants in war where as in Mahabarata we do. In both cases the so called Gods oversees the war with enormous interests while some taking either sides and others staying as on lookers.
What ever it may about the reality of these wars, we can say that they had happened, if at all they were, at a time when the role of women started being confined from principle owner of home to subordinate owner of home. In anthropological studies this is the period where we can see the evolution of human civilisation from the stage of women dominated to male dominated one, which is still surviving till today !
The dramatic dialogue Achilles tells to Bresis few minutes before his death is that “ Let them say I walked with giants “. This has in his minds the heated debates he enters in to with Agamemnon after initial victories over Troy where Agamemnon thunders “ History will remember Kings not foot soldiers”
What ever may history says, we can say that the age of Troy, and Indraprastha are gigantic steps in the evolution of human civilisation. Hence we can accept that Achilles’ saying by interpreting that all the characters of war of Troy are walked with giants !
Hector Could have Saved Troy
Let them say I walked with giants
Not to go in to chronological order of a tale that has more than 3000 years in its behind, the war of Troy has evoked certain observations when I looked at it. When I happened to be a student of English Literature in my graduation, we had a brief introduction of war of Troy as part of beginnings of modern drama, Homer as father of modern drama. Iliad and Odyssey are two lengthy poetic narrations by Homer who believed to live around 9th Century of BC in Greek. We were told that Iliad is about the war that lead to the fall of Troy and Odyssey is about the return journey of Agamemnon who lead the Greeks in that war and the life after Troy.
After a long gap of say about 15 years I am able to lay my hands on to the subject again. What surprised me is that the capacity of a 3000 years old story to ignite fresh thoughts about the persons and personalities apart from what had happened, why it was like so ! May be that is the beauty of an epic like Ramayana and Mahabharata, what we have had. At least in the case of Ramayana we had a writing figure Valmiki, though we can’t ascertain his authenticity. But in the case of Mahabharata, the writer, Vyasa still looks at least for me as a fictitious persona.
Coming back to the original story, the mythological narration can be found at http://www.royalty.nu/legends/Troy.html. I wish to just take some aspects only basically which surrounds the characters of Hector and Achilles, Priam, the king of Troy.
Hector : Tactically right
Eldest son of Praim ( king of Troy) a loyal country man and an effective commander who has an eye on the activities of Paris, his own brother who became so close to Helen, the wife of Menelaus, the Greek king Agamemnon’s brother. After the ceremony ( read the above link) night before Paris and his brother moves to Troy meets Helen and seduces her and also impresses her to elope with him to Troy where they can live a loving and peaceful life. Helen follows Paris directions and enters in to the ship that sailed to Troy in guise. On sea, Paris informs the same to Hector who becomes angry and also fears consequences. As soon as they arrives in Troy the picture unfolds in the Priam’s court where they decided even to fight for Paris’s love. In the court Hector warns the consequences and proposes to hand over Helen back to Menelaus and enter in to treaty to save the people and the country from the perils of war. But nobody hears as the Chief Priest also sides with Priam and encourages war. Through out this episod the Priam’s priest ill advices the rulers of Troy including taking the wooden horse wherein the Trojans sealed themselves in to city. Hector argues well having the tactical understanding after overseeing the war with Greeks for some years. He finds that the advances so far made by Troy military is due to divisions in the Agamemnon’s allies banking on the sea. For some time Achilles won’t take part in the war with his men. With out Achilles and his men, the Greek soldiers lost morale and starts running. Following the ill advise from chief priest and some other allies of small tribes Priam enters in to a deadly battle. One more aspect of Hector also I like. He is not only loyal to his people and a good commander. He is also upholds the moral principles. After killing Achilles’ friend thinking that he was Achilles, Hector confesses the same and gets himself ready to face the consequences lonely. He warns his wife to escape before the Greek army plunders city. In one on one fight Hector braves Achilles and dies in front of Troy city gates while his whole court is overlooking . He also refuses his archery to slew arches at Achilles while he roads on his chariot. After going through the personality of Hector one can sum up his character as morally right.
Achilles : The brave boy who always sides with the Greek in the troublesome period of Greek’s civilisation at his early stage secures en number of victories including the famous one of Troy. He and Agamemnon are completely opposite. Due to stiff differences with Agamemnon over Agamemnon’s wish to have Bresis, the Troy’s princes, Achilles asks his men not to take part in war for some years. Exactly those are the years when the Troy recorded some advances. After killing Hector, Achilles asks Greek army to return to the sea. Bresis tries her best to see that Achilles not to return to war filed. But with an ambition of conquering Troy, Agamemnon does not agrees for that. History has two opinions on the events that followed Hector’s death. Some says including Homeric verses that Greek army was vanished due to the spread of plague. Some says that after certain sections of Greek army vanishes, realising the problem Agamemnon and Achilles decides to make a giant size wooden horse by destroying the boats and shield themselves from plague. After some time Priam looks at the empty beaches where the wooden horse stands alone. The wooden horse enters in to Troy city and the men of Greek comes out on night and lit fire and sacks everyone who comes across and steels what ever they found worth including the destruction of the famous Apollo, the sun god’s temple.
Priam : Who happened to be unifier of Troy rule by conquering several tribal chiefs establishes well knit society in Troy. His only weakness is to follow the advices of his priest. Thus he paves way for the destruction of the empire which he built.
Menelaus and Agamemnon : Are zealous of Hector and Troy kingdom and waits for an opportunity. Helen’s elopement with Paris gives them opportunity to siege the Troy, which finally ends by doing so after a decade of war.
One more important thing we can find here is the culture of victorious army looking the temples for treasures. Thus we need not to find the BJP’s arguments in India about the Muslims rulers destroying hindu temples, a valid one. This phenomenon can be seen all along the history in spite of continental differences.
Similarities between Mahabarata and War of Troy : There are so many commonalities in both these wars. Both, if at all they had happened, happened in the late Bronze Age of human civilisation. The narrations of both the Homer and Vyasa are of same in nature. The disputes arises though over the retention and expansion of empires, reaches final stage over the question of Women ! Like in Mahabarata, in War of Troy also diplomacy precedes the war. Like in Mahabarata, both sides mobilises support of tribal chiefs of that time in and from the surrounding areas. Only difference is that war of Troy happens on the banks of Aegean Sea where as Mahabarata was basically land based war. In war of Troy we can’t find the usage of Elephants in war where as in Mahabarata we do. In both cases the so called Gods oversees the war with enormous interests while some taking either sides and others staying as on lookers.
What ever it may about the reality of these wars, we can say that they had happened, if at all they were, at a time when the role of women started being confined from principle owner of home to subordinate owner of home. In anthropological studies this is the period where we can see the evolution of human civilisation from the stage of women dominated to male dominated one, which is still surviving till today !
The dramatic dialogue Achilles tells to Bresis few minutes before his death is that “ Let them say I walked with giants “. This has in his minds the heated debates he enters in to with Agamemnon after initial victories over Troy where Agamemnon thunders “ History will remember Kings not foot soldiers”
What ever may history says, we can say that the age of Troy, and Indraprastha are gigantic steps in the evolution of human civilisation. Hence we can accept that Achilles’ saying by interpreting that all the characters of war of Troy are walked with giants !
Not to go in to chronological order of a tale that has more than 3000 years in its behind, the war of Troy has evoked certain observations when I looked at it. When I happened to be a student of English Literature in my graduation, we had a brief introduction of war of Troy as part of beginnings of modern drama, Homer as father of modern drama. Iliad and Odyssey are two lengthy poetic narrations by Homer who believed to live around 9th Century of BC in Greek. We were told that Iliad is about the war that lead to the fall of Troy and Odyssey is about the return journey of Agamemnon who lead the Greeks in that war and the life after Troy.
After a long gap of say about 15 years I am able to lay my hands on to the subject again. What surprised me is that the capacity of a 3000 years old story to ignite fresh thoughts about the persons and personalities apart from what had happened, why it was like so ! May be that is the beauty of an epic like Ramayana and Mahabharata, what we have had. At least in the case of Ramayana we had a writing figure Valmiki, though we can’t ascertain his authenticity. But in the case of Mahabharata, the writer, Vyasa still looks at least for me as a fictitious persona.
Coming back to the original story, the mythological narration can be found at http://www.royalty.nu/legends/Troy.html. I wish to just take some aspects only basically which surrounds the characters of Hector and Achilles, Priam, the king of Troy.
Hector : Tactically right
Eldest son of Praim ( king of Troy) a loyal country man and an effective commander who has an eye on the activities of Paris, his own brother who became so close to Helen, the wife of Menelaus, the Greek king Agamemnon’s brother. After the ceremony ( read the above link) night before Paris and his brother moves to Troy meets Helen and seduces her and also impresses her to elope with him to Troy where they can live a loving and peaceful life. Helen follows Paris directions and enters in to the ship that sailed to Troy in guise. On sea, Paris informs the same to Hector who becomes angry and also fears consequences. As soon as they arrives in Troy the picture unfolds in the Priam’s court where they decided even to fight for Paris’s love. In the court Hector warns the consequences and proposes to hand over Helen back to Menelaus and enter in to treaty to save the people and the country from the perils of war. But nobody hears as the Chief Priest also sides with Priam and encourages war. Through out this episod the Priam’s priest ill advices the rulers of Troy including taking the wooden horse wherein the Trojans sealed themselves in to city. Hector argues well having the tactical understanding after overseeing the war with Greeks for some years. He finds that the advances so far made by Troy military is due to divisions in the Agamemnon’s allies banking on the sea. For some time Achilles won’t take part in the war with his men. With out Achilles and his men, the Greek soldiers lost morale and starts running. Following the ill advise from chief priest and some other allies of small tribes Priam enters in to a deadly battle. One more aspect of Hector also I like. He is not only loyal to his people and a good commander. He is also upholds the moral principles. After killing Achilles’ friend thinking that he was Achilles, Hector confesses the same and gets himself ready to face the consequences lonely. He warns his wife to escape before the Greek army plunders city. In one on one fight Hector braves Achilles and dies in front of Troy city gates while his whole court is overlooking . He also refuses his archery to slew arches at Achilles while he roads on his chariot. After going through the personality of Hector one can sum up his character as morally right.
Achilles : The brave boy who always sides with the Greek in the troublesome period of Greek’s civilisation at his early stage secures en number of victories including the famous one of Troy. He and Agamemnon are completely opposite. Due to stiff differences with Agamemnon over Agamemnon’s wish to have Bresis, the Troy’s princes, Achilles asks his men not to take part in war for some years. Exactly those are the years when the Troy recorded some advances. After killing Hector, Achilles asks Greek army to return to the sea. Bresis tries her best to see that Achilles not to return to war filed. But with an ambition of conquering Troy, Agamemnon does not agrees for that. History has two opinions on the events that followed Hector’s death. Some says including Homeric verses that Greek army was vanished due to the spread of plague. Some says that after certain sections of Greek army vanishes, realising the problem Agamemnon and Achilles decides to make a giant size wooden horse by destroying the boats and shield themselves from plague. After some time Priam looks at the empty beaches where the wooden horse stands alone. The wooden horse enters in to Troy city and the men of Greek comes out on night and lit fire and sacks everyone who comes across and steels what ever they found worth including the destruction of the famous Apollo, the sun god’s temple.
Priam : Who happened to be unifier of Troy rule by conquering several tribal chiefs establishes well knit society in Troy. His only weakness is to follow the advices of his priest. Thus he paves way for the destruction of the empire which he built.
Menelaus and Agamemnon : Are zealous of Hector and Troy kingdom and waits for an opportunity. Helen’s elopement with Paris gives them opportunity to siege the Troy, which finally ends by doing so after a decade of war.
One more important thing we can find here is the culture of victorious army looking the temples for treasures. Thus we need not to find the BJP’s arguments in India about the Muslims rulers destroying hindu temples, a valid one. This phenomenon can be seen all along the history in spite of continental differences.
Similarities between Mahabarata and War of Troy : There are so many commonalities in both these wars. Both, if at all they had happened, happened in the late Bronze Age of human civilisation. The narrations of both the Homer and Vyasa are of same in nature. The disputes arises though over the retention and expansion of empires, reaches final stage over the question of Women ! Like in Mahabarata, in War of Troy also diplomacy precedes the war. Like in Mahabarata, both sides mobilises support of tribal chiefs of that time in and from the surrounding areas. Only difference is that war of Troy happens on the banks of Aegean Sea where as Mahabarata was basically land based war. In war of Troy we can’t find the usage of Elephants in war where as in Mahabarata we do. In both cases the so called Gods oversees the war with enormous interests while some taking either sides and others staying as on lookers.
What ever it may about the reality of these wars, we can say that they had happened, if at all they were, at a time when the role of women started being confined from principle owner of home to subordinate owner of home. In anthropological studies this is the period where we can see the evolution of human civilisation from the stage of women dominated to male dominated one, which is still surviving till today !
The dramatic dialogue Achilles tells to Bresis few minutes before his death is that “ Let them say I walked with giants “. This has in his minds the heated debates he enters in to with Agamemnon after initial victories over Troy where Agamemnon thunders “ History will remember Kings not foot soldiers”
What ever may history says, we can say that the age of Troy, and Indraprastha are gigantic steps in the evolution of human civilisation. Hence we can accept that Achilles’ saying by interpreting that all the characters of war of Troy are walked with giants !
Friday, August 29, 2008
Hurricane is Beautiful !
Hurricane is Beautiful !
Recently I happened to see a movie in Z Studio titled The Hurricane. At its outset the movie seemed, for me at least, a movie with difference. Then after tiring off from office work started viewing the movie which was relayed around 11 pm on Wednesday. As the movie runs, sleep also moved away from me. Then I tried to really grab the issue and context of the movie. Though I am not familiar with the American assent of New Jersey, I could gather the following impression of that movie which was a real story of a Negro who fought for justice.
I am posting my impression of that story because as my generation views US as the greatest symbol for individuality and personal freedom, the fact is otherwise. That is the general impression which settled in my mind after my high school education where I read about the civil war in USA. The presentation at the high school about the subject was off course in a different mode ! Gradually what I came to know from readings is that the Civil war broke out in USA only after the so called Negro population started ascertaining their rights under US constitution i.e right to equality and right to liberty. Starting from the establishment of United States of America under the leadership of George Washington, the commander there is a stark division between the Whites and Black in all respects of their society. Even after Abraham Lincoln’s contribution to the US society, the US is implementing its dual treatment to Negro. This ultimately brought the famous Martin Luther King to the national scene. He is acclaimed even certain sections in India for different reasons. In this case also our Luther King has been introduced to our generation in different syllabus as the follower of Gandhian principles, peaceful non cooperation. As far as my memory goes, we were not told in our classrooms the reasons for the success of Kings movement in early 70’s ! I am sneering in to this topic because the movie The Hurricane also portraits a Negro’s life of early 70’s of last century US where he has been behind the bars only because of he is a Black.
The story begins with a court scene where the learned (?) judge cautions a boy ( Ruby Carter) that unless he falls in to line with law of the land he would become a dangerous man for the society ! While hearing a petty case the judge delivers 12 year sentence against that boy. The boy assiduously undergoes the imprisonment where he prepares himself to face the life out of jail. With a sever effort he becomes a boxer. After jail life he becomes prize catch boy for the organisers of boxing competition. Due to the speed of his punching he is nicknamed as Hurricane ! His success goes on until he wins in the bout national championship against another boxer who happened to be a White skinned. The umpire declares the White skinned looser as national champion despite the overcrowded objections from the audiences. After that competition, Ruby on the way reaches a casino where he finds all the staff were murdered. The police who happened to guard that street stoles the money in the cash box after the firing by miscreants and also calls on a lady in the bar to inform her that a black guy fired at . She in turn called up police station who arrives and arrests Ruby and the court as usual sentences him for the life imprisonment. After reaching the jailer Ruby refuses to wear white uniform with number which the criminal uses to wear. He argues with the jailer who is also white skinned and as a result the jailer orders solitary confinement.
Meanwhile his younger brother finds as a refuge finds an asylum with a Canadian family across the boarder. Initially he also feels that he is being discriminated because of he is not Whit skinned. Gradually the he mingles with the family well and tells them that he wants to become boxer like Ruby. From him the family comes to know about Ruby, the jailed boxer and meets him, offers their help to bring him out. Initially Ruby refuses but the Canadian family moves to an apartment in front of that jail and keeps on working on the missing links in Ruby’s case. They finds valuable evidences which can help Ruby to be out. Finally with help of lawyers they reopens the case and the Judge rules in favour of Ruby saying that the previous judgement is ill minded and violates the constitution which guarantees free and fair trail of victims irrespective of their nationality and lets him free only in 1984. Before Ruby becomes a free bird the retrail which was ordered in 1976 by New Jersey court also convicts him again in 1976.
While in jail, what I liked most of the movie is, the way Ruby controls his senses. Usually in such circumstances, the environment and the kind of treatment offered by the wards leads to loss of mental balance. In such a situation Ruby never left his daily routine exercise like any other boxer to keep his senses under control. Though he fought with the help of loving family who had nothing to do with him except a relation as general as relation among the ordinary human beings, the way he stood up for his rights really admired me. The court proceedings also creates a styled enthusiasm. Finally he becomes free and flees to Canada along with that family. On the stairs in front of the court while responding to a question about his experiences in jail, he looks at open sky as he is not able to see the sunlight except the gloomy electric bulbs. He finally comments, “ The Hurricane is Beautiful”. This reminds me another story I read as part of my English lessons as high school student, Jessy Owens who also fought with the colour discrimination which is prevalent in 50s of last century, before he qualifies for Olympics ! What I could gather is that the so called leading democracy in the world, the US is not so democratic towards a major section of its population.
Recently I happened to see a movie in Z Studio titled The Hurricane. At its outset the movie seemed, for me at least, a movie with difference. Then after tiring off from office work started viewing the movie which was relayed around 11 pm on Wednesday. As the movie runs, sleep also moved away from me. Then I tried to really grab the issue and context of the movie. Though I am not familiar with the American assent of New Jersey, I could gather the following impression of that movie which was a real story of a Negro who fought for justice.
I am posting my impression of that story because as my generation views US as the greatest symbol for individuality and personal freedom, the fact is otherwise. That is the general impression which settled in my mind after my high school education where I read about the civil war in USA. The presentation at the high school about the subject was off course in a different mode ! Gradually what I came to know from readings is that the Civil war broke out in USA only after the so called Negro population started ascertaining their rights under US constitution i.e right to equality and right to liberty. Starting from the establishment of United States of America under the leadership of George Washington, the commander there is a stark division between the Whites and Black in all respects of their society. Even after Abraham Lincoln’s contribution to the US society, the US is implementing its dual treatment to Negro. This ultimately brought the famous Martin Luther King to the national scene. He is acclaimed even certain sections in India for different reasons. In this case also our Luther King has been introduced to our generation in different syllabus as the follower of Gandhian principles, peaceful non cooperation. As far as my memory goes, we were not told in our classrooms the reasons for the success of Kings movement in early 70’s ! I am sneering in to this topic because the movie The Hurricane also portraits a Negro’s life of early 70’s of last century US where he has been behind the bars only because of he is a Black.
The story begins with a court scene where the learned (?) judge cautions a boy ( Ruby Carter) that unless he falls in to line with law of the land he would become a dangerous man for the society ! While hearing a petty case the judge delivers 12 year sentence against that boy. The boy assiduously undergoes the imprisonment where he prepares himself to face the life out of jail. With a sever effort he becomes a boxer. After jail life he becomes prize catch boy for the organisers of boxing competition. Due to the speed of his punching he is nicknamed as Hurricane ! His success goes on until he wins in the bout national championship against another boxer who happened to be a White skinned. The umpire declares the White skinned looser as national champion despite the overcrowded objections from the audiences. After that competition, Ruby on the way reaches a casino where he finds all the staff were murdered. The police who happened to guard that street stoles the money in the cash box after the firing by miscreants and also calls on a lady in the bar to inform her that a black guy fired at . She in turn called up police station who arrives and arrests Ruby and the court as usual sentences him for the life imprisonment. After reaching the jailer Ruby refuses to wear white uniform with number which the criminal uses to wear. He argues with the jailer who is also white skinned and as a result the jailer orders solitary confinement.
Meanwhile his younger brother finds as a refuge finds an asylum with a Canadian family across the boarder. Initially he also feels that he is being discriminated because of he is not Whit skinned. Gradually the he mingles with the family well and tells them that he wants to become boxer like Ruby. From him the family comes to know about Ruby, the jailed boxer and meets him, offers their help to bring him out. Initially Ruby refuses but the Canadian family moves to an apartment in front of that jail and keeps on working on the missing links in Ruby’s case. They finds valuable evidences which can help Ruby to be out. Finally with help of lawyers they reopens the case and the Judge rules in favour of Ruby saying that the previous judgement is ill minded and violates the constitution which guarantees free and fair trail of victims irrespective of their nationality and lets him free only in 1984. Before Ruby becomes a free bird the retrail which was ordered in 1976 by New Jersey court also convicts him again in 1976.
While in jail, what I liked most of the movie is, the way Ruby controls his senses. Usually in such circumstances, the environment and the kind of treatment offered by the wards leads to loss of mental balance. In such a situation Ruby never left his daily routine exercise like any other boxer to keep his senses under control. Though he fought with the help of loving family who had nothing to do with him except a relation as general as relation among the ordinary human beings, the way he stood up for his rights really admired me. The court proceedings also creates a styled enthusiasm. Finally he becomes free and flees to Canada along with that family. On the stairs in front of the court while responding to a question about his experiences in jail, he looks at open sky as he is not able to see the sunlight except the gloomy electric bulbs. He finally comments, “ The Hurricane is Beautiful”. This reminds me another story I read as part of my English lessons as high school student, Jessy Owens who also fought with the colour discrimination which is prevalent in 50s of last century, before he qualifies for Olympics ! What I could gather is that the so called leading democracy in the world, the US is not so democratic towards a major section of its population.
Dylon's Poem in Solidorty to Ruby
Pistol shots ring out in the barroom night
Enter Patty Valentine from the upper hall.
She sees the bartender in a pool of blood,
Cries out, "My God, they killed them all!"
Here comes the story of the Hurricane,
The man the authorities came to blame
For somethin' that he never done.
Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been
The champion of the world.
Three bodies lyin' there does Patty see
And another man named Bello, movin' around mysteriously.
"I didn't do it," he says, and he throws up his hands
"I was only robbin' the register, I hope you understand.
"I saw them leavin'," he says, and he stops
"One of us had better call up the cops."
And so Patty calls the cops
And they arrive on the scene with their red lights flashin'
In the hot New Jersey night.
Meanwhile, far away in another part of town
Rubin Carter and a couple of friends are drivin' around.
Number one contender for the middleweight crown
Had no idea what kinda shit was about to go down
When a cop pulled him over to the side of the road
Just like the time before and the time before that.
In Paterson that's just the way things go.
If you're black you might as well not show up on the street
'Less you wanna draw the heat.
Alfred Bello had a partner and he had a rap for the cops.
Him and Arthur Dexter Bradley were just out prowlin' around
He said, "I saw two men runnin' out, they looked like middleweights
They jumped into a white car with out-of-state plates."
And Miss Patty Valentine just nodded her head.
Cop said, "Wait a minute, boys, this one's not dead"
So they took him to the infirmary
And though this man could hardly see
They told him that he could identify the guilty men.
Four in the mornin' and they haul Rubin in,
They took him to the hospital and they brought him upstairs.
The wounded man looks up through his one dyin' eye
Says, "Why'd you bring him in here for? He ain't the guy!"
Here's the story of the Hurricane,
The man the authorities came to blame
For somethin' that he never done.
Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been
The champion of the world.
Four months later, the ghettos are in flame,
Rubin's in South America, fightin' for his name
While Arthur Dexter Bradley's still in the robbery game
And the cops are puttin' the screws to him, lookin' for somebody to blame.
"Remember that murder that happened in a bar?"
"Remember you said you saw the getaway car?"
"You think you'd like to play ball with the law?"
"Think it might-a been that fighter that you saw runnin' that night?"
"Don't forget that you are white."
Arthur Dexter Bradley said, "I'm really not sure."
Cops said, "A poor boy like you could use a break
We got you for the motel job and we're talkin' to your friend Bello
You don't wanta have to go back to jail, be a nice fellow.
You'll be doin' society a favor.
That sonofabitch is brave and gettin' braver.
We want to put his ass in stir
We want to pin this triple murder on him
He ain't no Gentleman Jim."
Rubin could take a man out with just one punch
But he never did like to talk about it all that much.
It's my work, he'd say, and I do it for pay
And when it's over I'd just as soon go on my way
Up to some paradise
Where the trout streams flow and the air is nice
And ride a horse along the trail.
But then they took him to the jailhouse
Where they try to turn a man into a mouse.
All of Rubin's cards were marked in advance
The trial was a pig-circus, he never had a chance.
The judge made Rubin's witnesses drunkards from the slums
To the white folks who watched he was a revolutionary bum
And to the black folks he was just a crazy nigger.
No one doubted that he pulled the trigger.
And though they could not produce the gun,
The D.A. said he was the one who did the deed
And the all-white jury agreed.
Rubin Carter was falsely tried.
The crime was murder "one," guess who testified?
Bello and Bradley and they both baldly lied
And the newspapers, they all went along for the ride.
How can the life of such a man
Be in the palm of some fool's hand?
To see him obviously framed
Couldn't help but make me feel ashamed to live in a land
Where justice is a game.
Now all the criminals in their coats and their ties
Are free to drink martinis and watch the sun rise
While Rubin sits like Buddha in a ten-foot cell
An innocent man in a living hell.
Yes, that's the story of the Hurricane,
But it won't be over till they clear his name
And give him back the time he's done.
Put in a prison cell, but one time he could-a been
The champion of the world.
Monday, August 25, 2008
Valuable Vally
Monday, August 25, 2008
Valuable Valley
This is just to share my thoughts with the viewers of my blog space on the ongoing controversy over the land transfer in Jammu to Sri Amarnath Shrine Board which turned in to factionist movement in Kashmir and religious frenzy in Jammu, both of antithetical to the constitutional spirit of India.
I feel this whole situation is creation of ruling parties eying on the forthcoming assembly and parliament elections without calculating the risk of opening Pandora’s Box. Much deeper issues involved here are the issues relating to crises of Identity in both Jammu and Kashmir region. Over the last six decades both the major players at Center and in Jammu Kashmir played by wiping this identity issues. Out of my little observation what I found is that when ever there is sufficient space provided to vent the urge in democratic form, the people supported neither separatists nor religious forces which are bound to destroy the cultural fabric of Jammu and Kashmir. As long as the major ruling parties are utilizing this political space allowed to them in allaying the fears and satisfying people's aspirations the so called separatists sidelined from main stream and happened vice versa also. When ever the ruling parties failed to deliver the commitments and honor the sentiments, in the absence of sufficient democratic space to air their feelings people opted to run under the leadership of dividing forces. Particularly after the last 10 years, the parties which came to power in the state failed to deliver as per the expectations. To shield their failures, the ruling parties are habituated to raise such issues of grabbing the eyeballs with out doing much. With such calculations only the PDP+Cong government paved way for this agitation which is now moving out of their hands even. The party which is part of government in the state and partner in Delhi's UPA alliance, PDP is whipping up with the masses and even not felt difficult to walk up to the Muzaffarpur which is nothing but sheer politics !
Suggestions
1. The center immediately should take steps to de-link the emotional issues that grabbed the main issue.
2. Foot down iron heel on those who are whipping up emotion over the common issues.
3. Find a workable solution to the genuine issue.
4. Isolate both the separatists and communalists from the issues and from the masses to create a buffer zone for democratic activity.
Valuable Valley
This is just to share my thoughts with the viewers of my blog space on the ongoing controversy over the land transfer in Jammu to Sri Amarnath Shrine Board which turned in to factionist movement in Kashmir and religious frenzy in Jammu, both of antithetical to the constitutional spirit of India.
I feel this whole situation is creation of ruling parties eying on the forthcoming assembly and parliament elections without calculating the risk of opening Pandora’s Box. Much deeper issues involved here are the issues relating to crises of Identity in both Jammu and Kashmir region. Over the last six decades both the major players at Center and in Jammu Kashmir played by wiping this identity issues. Out of my little observation what I found is that when ever there is sufficient space provided to vent the urge in democratic form, the people supported neither separatists nor religious forces which are bound to destroy the cultural fabric of Jammu and Kashmir. As long as the major ruling parties are utilizing this political space allowed to them in allaying the fears and satisfying people's aspirations the so called separatists sidelined from main stream and happened vice versa also. When ever the ruling parties failed to deliver the commitments and honor the sentiments, in the absence of sufficient democratic space to air their feelings people opted to run under the leadership of dividing forces. Particularly after the last 10 years, the parties which came to power in the state failed to deliver as per the expectations. To shield their failures, the ruling parties are habituated to raise such issues of grabbing the eyeballs with out doing much. With such calculations only the PDP+Cong government paved way for this agitation which is now moving out of their hands even. The party which is part of government in the state and partner in Delhi's UPA alliance, PDP is whipping up with the masses and even not felt difficult to walk up to the Muzaffarpur which is nothing but sheer politics !
Suggestions
1. The center immediately should take steps to de-link the emotional issues that grabbed the main issue.
2. Foot down iron heel on those who are whipping up emotion over the common issues.
3. Find a workable solution to the genuine issue.
4. Isolate both the separatists and communalists from the issues and from the masses to create a buffer zone for democratic activity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
