sunlight through the blinds...

the phantom spoke about the power of one good officer to do with one stroke of his pen what a thousand NGOs cannot do in a thousand years. he was quoting madhu kishwar, so i don't know whether or not he believes that himself. [his readers, including yours truly:), have for some inexplicable reason, led the discussion into a circuitous discourse of public morality and ethics, so i can't really make out his views about this particular point]. anyway. but, i certainly believe it. it was this belief that made me, a staunch votary of the minimalist state that should get out of the hair of the average citizen, join the system.

which is why i was extremely happy to get some validation yesterday from another guest speaker — barkha dutt of ndtv — about the singularly extraordinary opportunity that the system provides to good officers to make a difference...a real difference.
while recounting her experiences of covering Kashmir, she spoke eloquently about how J M Lyngdoh is single-handedly responsible for altering the political future of the Valley by spearheading the landmark 2002 elections, which were globally certified as free and fair (again thanks to his efforts to allow international observers to inspect and ratify the electoral process).

of course, there is exaggeration in this portrayal of the lone crusader...but the sad truth is that in many ways, that's what honest and well-meaning officers are sometimes forced to become.

an aside: the woman knows how to evoke emotion...at least in me. goose-pimply many times (especially when she spoke about Lyngdoh), i was even moved to near-tears on occasion...but then, i cry at the drop of a hat, so that doesn't say much :-) !!

waiting for the phantom's promised sequel...

i wonder why heterosexual women (usually) have no problem in admitting that they might have, sometime in their lives, been attracted to another woman, but heterosexual men totally cringe at the very suggestion that they might be attracted to another man.

does it have something to do with the differences in the popular perception of gays and lesbians? or does it go deeper than that? i've read nothing on the subject. this is simply what i think, just a hunch. so please excuse the lack of knowledge and the sweeping generalisations...this is just me thinking aloud.....

generally speaking, in any homosexual relationship, whether between two males or two females, one person assumes a masculine role and the other feminine. thus, in a lesbian couple there is usually a butch playing the masculine part, and in a gay couple there is usually this really effeminate guy playing the feminine part.

so, for a woman to admit that she might harbour secret feelings for another woman, the maximum she is admitting to is that she might have some masculine characteristics. well, what's the big deal in that? since most women today grow up as "tomboys" and continue to dress, talk and act in definite so-called masculine ways as adults.

but, for a man to admit any such inclinations, he is effectively exposing himself to the danger of being thought of or labelled as effeminate... something completely appalling to most men.

thus, so-called masculine characteristics such as firmness, ruthlessness, cold hard logic, precision, aggressiveness etc. are seen as some sort of universal ideals to be pursued by everyone alike, while so-called feminine characteristics like nurturance, emotionality, compassion, delicacy of thought and action etc. are seen as some sort of "weak" and therefore dispensable attributes, that even the women don't want to be identified with, leave alone the men!

this is something so obviously visible even in something as simple (yet funadamental) as clothing. the women rush to emulate the male way of dressing, but find me a guy who wants to try out skirts and saris (no, rohit bal fashion shows don't count!)

so the clever raymonds advertisement notwithstanding, i believe that the day is far, far away when a man will take pride in admitting that he has a "feminine" side to his personality that makes him complete...

got a firsthand experience of how things are in the bureaucracy... and what havoc level-jumping can cause...

got a call from tiku early in the morning, asking me to organise a house journal meeting, as if i'm the secy! then he asked me if K is a journalist in a derisive tone, didn't wait for a reply and answered himself, saying he obviously isn't because he doesn't know anything... gawd! i'm getting caught in the middle...tiku asks me to do things, which makes them my responsibility, but i have no authority to implement them! what to do? plus, i don't want friction with K, considering that we became friends on the trek...i hope things work out...

the stupid meeting screwed up my life on the personal front as well..i was planning to run off home over the weekend, which i had to scrap. and even the trip to doon had to be cut short, making it a whirlwind shopping spree (ended up splurging over eight grand on full-price branded stuff!!) but good fun... felt great to get tangible proof of my weight loss, since i had to buy one waist size smaller :-)

the evening meeting (with tiku, raju and chameli), was for all the clubs and societies secretaries. i wondered what the hell i was doing there? to make matters worse, the dussera celebrations organisation was thrust on me by chameli, which includes ramlila!!...shit...i'm being forced to bite off more than i can chew...with parasailing, river-rafting, cultural night, house journal, treasure hunt, editing the management circle's journal et al, when the hell am i supposed to read, write the essay, make the trek report, work on the syndicate work? AAAARRGH...i want to tear my hair out...

forced to lie flatback on the soddy, soggy dhurries in the biting cold of a misty mussourie morning, i saw it...the eye in the sky...
wisps of thready, stringy, clouds forming an uncannily symmetrical circular portal, beckoning me to rise up and escape...quite surreal. or maybe everything takes on a mystical connotation at 6am after a sleepless, weepy night!