Nationality - Olympics and representation

Note to readers: Spelling conforms to UK English. I am going back to my pre-US days and since the Games are being hosted by London, it is a nod to the mother country of the English language. 

Not that there is any law stopping me from using whatever version of English I please, US, UK, Australian or even Hinglish (Hindi mixed with English) or, for that matter, pig Latin. Just thinking, I am going to try pig Latin one day and give you readers the legend, it will be like an encrypted message, ha ha.

There are always some heavyweights when it comes to international sports. Countries such as the United States, China, Japan, Russia, Australia and the United Kingdom along with some European countries such as France and Germany, always come out on tops in the overall medal tally.

As a native born Indian, I usually share the common lament of my compatriots: When, oh when, are we going to see our tricolour fluttering at the medal ceremony and hear "Jana Gana Mana" being played?

To their credit, Indians did win a handful of medals this time. And I wholeheartedly congratulate our athletes, Vijay Kumar, Yogeshwar Dutt, Sushil Kumar and Saina Nehwal for keeping our 'jhanda/kodi' ('jhanda' - meaning flag in Hindi, 'kodi' meaning flag in Tamil) flying high. Check out this slideshow on Indian medal winners at this year's Olympics on India Today.

I really did not want to get into whining mode. Honestly. I am not going to whine about how our government doesn't do enough, how our parents don't encourage us to pursue sports, blah, blah, sniffle. This post is not about one particular country. It is, in fact, quite the opposite. It is about how many nations participate in the making of a champion or a series of winners.

Training away from home, or at home with foreign help -

Take the example of the 10, 000 metres winner, Mo Farah. He was born in Somalia, emigrated to the UK when he was about eight and trained in Portland, Oregon, United States with one of America's famous long distance running and marathon coaches, Alberto Salazar. His training partner, the American, Galen Rupp, took home the silver medal. Isn't that a sweet victory for the trio of coach and pupils?

To add to this pinnacle of achievement, Mo Farah also took home the gold for the 5, 000 metres.

I found this article on the British newspaper site, the Telegraph, about how his move to the US transformed his athletic career.

[Incidentally, Portland, Oregon was my residence of a few years and still is a place I call home in my heart. It is a verdant green city surrounded by the snow capped Cascades, forests, trails and waterfalls and gets a lot of rain, just like the British Isles.
The flag bearer of the US Olympic team at the opening ceremony in London, the fencer, Mariel Zagunis is from Beaverton, part of the Portland metro area, too, so that makes me doubly proud.]

Mo Farah's win is a prime example of a product of multiple nationalities. This goes not only for athletes who represent their home country but train abroad but also those who train at home with foreign coaches.

CNN had a few inspiring stories of athletes from lesser privileged backgrounds and impoverished nations, who were helped by either emigrating to a developed nation or help from athletes of well-to-do nations.
The runner who was born in Sudan but who trains in and represents the US, Lopez Lomong, and this Rwandan mountain bike rider, Adrien Niyonshuti, featured on CNN's site, are two such respective examples.

Then, there is the fabled Chinese 16-year-old swimmer, Ye Shiwen, who apparently had a lower split time in the last 50 metres of her 400 metre swimming race than many male greats. She trained in Australia.

Major International Sports

Cricket
In recent years, India, with its mad craze for the game of cricket, had its national team coached by top notch former players from abroad such as Australians, John Wright and Greg Chappell. India's World Cup winning team of 2011 was coached by Gary Kirsten of South Africa. Many top Indian players have honed their skills on the green fields of English county cricket grounds, as mentioned in this article on Indian Express.

Basketball
There are many athletes who have benefited from training and competing in the US. European and Asian basketball players such as Rudy Fernandez who played for Spain and Yao Ming who has represented China, have been members of NBA teams in the US.

Soccer
Similarly, many international soccer players are members of top European leagues, helping them to compete with and learn from the best in the world.

Sponsorship -

Many athletes are sponsored by multinational companies such as Coca Cola, Pepsi, Adidas and Nike, who by their very definition owe their roots to one country but subsequent reach to many.

Immigration - 

If you noticed, there is quite a bit of racial diversity in the delegations of the United States, the United Kingdom and Canada, countries that typically attract a lot of immigrants from Asia, Africa and other European countries.

The US gymnastics team is the quintessential immigrant success story. I probably don't need to emphasize why I picked this, gymnastics nut as I am:) but there is another reason. Unlike basketball or tennis, gymnastics was not traditionally a US-dominated sport. Sure, America has a tradition of acrobatics, too.
However, utter the word gymnastics, and one would always be reminded of Russian and Romanian girls and guys, with their pointy toes and toned, graceful bodies like ballet dancers. The former USSR, Romania and some of the other Eastern European countries, along with China and Japan, were the leaders on the international gymnastics stage. Even today, Russia dominates events such as rhythmic gymnastics, just check out these London 2012 results on BBC.
Here is a great piece on Russian gymnasts in Splice Today.

In the 80s and 90s, this slowly started to change. Today, the Americans are a force to reckon with and it is very rare to not see the Stars and Stripes being raised at a gymnastics medal ceremony.

This is the site of USA Gymnastics with records of champions from the revival of the modern Olympic Games until now.

Here is a very informative slideshow on the history of US gymnastics on the bleacher report. I learnt that Americans did win medals at international events in the early 1900s but lost out later to European countries, Japan and China.

If you watched the drama of the women's balance beam final with Aly Raisman of the US initially being pipped to the bronze by Catalina Ponor of Romania, you might have noticed a certain grey-haired gentleman rise up in the stands, asking Aly's coach to appeal the decision.
There was a subsequent appeal and after re-evaluation by the judges, the bronze was awarded to Aly.

That distinguished gentleman was Bela Karolyi and his wife, Marta Karolyi, was sitting right next to him. Bela and Marta Karolyi are the famous coaches of champions past and present, one of whom happens to be the icon, Nadia Comaneci, the first woman to score a  perfect 10, the shining star of the 1976 Montreal Olympics. This couple defected to the US from the Romania before the fall of communism. Marta Karolyi was the Team Co-ordinator for the US this time.

Nastia Liukin, the Beijing Olympics individual all-round champion, was born in Russia to a father and mother who were both gymnastics champions. They emigrated to the US when Nastia was a little girl and the US got a gem of an immigrant family. The rest, as they say, is history.

Then there is Liang Chow. This is the coach of Shawn Johnson, the silver medalist in the individual all round final of the women's artistic gymnastics event in Beijing four years ago.
This year, he is the proud coach of the gold medalist in the women's individual all-round final, Gabrielle Douglas, known more famously as Gabby Douglas. She made history as the first African-American woman to win the title. I haven't seen any non-Caucasian win it before.

Liang Chow represented China as a world class medal-winning gymnast before emigrating to the US. Many former champion gymnasts such as Daniela Silivas and Nadia Comaneci of Romania and Svetlana Boginskaya of the former USSR have moved to the US, too.

The United States is not the only one to benefit from immigration. Among the young, pony-tailed, teeny-bopper brigade of gymnasts in London, there was a veteran, Oksana Chusovitina. This woman is 37 years old,  a gnarled old tree in the world of gymnastics where even 25 is considered over the hill. She is one of the two older gymnasts in competition in this Olympiad.
She managed to surprise us all with her somersaults and flips. Her story is remarkable not only because of her age. Her unique and trying circumstances have contributed to a life full of twists and turns, just like her routine. [Do read this column on Slate about the perils and triumphs of gymnastics and the book, "Little Girls in Pretty Boxes". I got the link for the older gymnasts from the Slate article.]

Oksana originally represented the USSR when she was a young girl. After the Soviet Union collapsed, she performed for Uzbekistan. Unfortunately, her son was diagnosed with leukaemia and the quest for his treatment landed her in Germany, her current home. She now sports the German team colours. At this age, she still made it to the event finals of the vault. Oksana is truly an example of humans being parts of different countries and being a positive contributor to every one of them.

I heard of the American footwear giant, Nike's programme to encourage basketball at the grassroots level in China. [Nike is from Portland, Oregon, too, woo hoo!]. Read this article on Oregon Business.

I am just thinking, may we see a LeBron James or Shaquille O'Neal coaching a budding Indian basketball team some day? Or a Russian coaching an Indonesian gymnastics team? It would be great to see more variety, more healthy competition in every sport.
The world would be a fitter place with more inspired youngsters both physically and mentally.

Many thanks to all the original sources I have linked to.

Reflections on the Olympics, London 2012

Note to readers: This post conforms to spelling according to UK English rules. Just thought I'd go back to my pre-US days and since the Games are being hosted by London, this is a nod to the British:).

For the past ten or so days, I have been glued to the television for several hours, watching NBC's telecast of the London Olympics of 2012.

The Olympics and also the Asian and the Commonwealth Games were part of my growing up years. I have always been fascinated by the parade of virtually all the nations on this earth, and all the events with the best of each country pitted against each other.

The Olympics are, of course, the king of all sports events, in my humble opinion. This is THE most varied, best known, most prestigious sporting event there is. It is a truly international pageant.

It is one of those rare occasions where even people who normally don't care much for sports sit and watch even lesser known events such as water polo, judo and synchronised swimming. And, I wait with bated breath for my favourite event, gymnastics.
If you have read my previous posts, you might be aware that I am a huge fan of the gymnast, Nadia Comaneci, even though she had retired by the time I was old enough to even comprehend what the Olympics meant. I had watched a four-part movie about her life when I was in school and was completely blown over. I scribbled doodles of gymnasts on random scraps of paper, nursing the impossible dream that I would be one, too:). Ah, the imagination of a child!

The names of various past gymnasts and athletes from other disciplines from countries such as Romania, Ethiopia, Ukraine and China still ring a bell in my head, though I can't utter a single word in any of their languages. Some of these athletes are Svetlana Khorkina (Gymnastics, Russia), Ecatrina Szabo (Gymnastics, Romania), Daniela Silivas (Gymnastics, Romania), Carly Patterson (Gymnastics, USA), Nastia Liukin and Shawn Johnson (Gymnastics, USA), Haile Gebrselassie (Long distance running, Track and Field, Ethiopia), Sergey Bubka (Pole Vault, Ukraine), Wu Minxia (Diving, China), Ian Thorpe (Swimming, Australia) and Dara Torres (Swimming, USA). Stars such as the legendary swimmer and Olympic record holder for the most medals, Michael Phelps of the US and the runner, Usain Bolt of Jamaica will be remembered and will continue to inspire for years to come.

I would (and still do) eagerly wait for events such as gymnastics, swimming, diving and synchronised swimming. The Games are a place where you can savour the breadth and beauty of human diversity, hearing obscure, normally unpronounceable names from Latvia to Laos, Ecuador to Ethiopia, and the United States to the United Arab Emirates. It is one common ground to see the multicoloured flags of so many nations and also get to know the new countries that have recently been born.

As one of my friends said, you also get to see the people from every corner of this planet, what they look like and sometimes even hear a smattering of their languages.

The opening ceremony was a delight for history and literature buffs featuring scenes from the Industrial Revolution, the pre-Industrial pastoral lifestyle, the various literary characters from Harry Potter to Alice in Wonderland and all that make Britain a great contributor to humanity.
Some comparisons to the spectacular show that the Chinese put up about four years ago at Beijing did pop up in my circle, but, I think each country showed us something unique, their culture and history, beautiful people and garments, dance and music.

The highlight of the evening was, of course, the James Bond clip, featuring Queen Elizabeth II with the actor Daniel Craig, and then the Queen jumping off a helicopter above the actual Olympic stadium:) (even if it was a stunt double who did the actual jump). I have watched many opening and closing ceremonies, full of pomp and colour and co-ordinated dances, but, wow! This particular sequence will be probably etched in my memory for years to come.
Dances and costumes, parades and visual effects fade from memory but characters like Bond and a very formal, famous royal, known for her reserve, performing such a daring act, stay much longer.
Danny Boyle, the well known director of movies such as "Slumdog Millionaire", pulled off a commendable feat.

Now that the Games will soon come to a close, there will be withdrawal symptoms for sure. The motto "Inspire a Generation" does hold true, I believe. Along with my friends and family, I have been inspired to work out, stretch, get fit and accomplish my goals. If an event can get you off the couch and do something, it is well worth the time, money and media coverage.

Colorado shootings - Senseless violence and Guns

About two weeks ago, there was a terrible tragedy in Aurora, Colorado, as a lone gunman opened fire at a midnight screening of "The Dark Knight Rises", in the wee hours of 20th July, 2012, killing about 14 people and severely wounding several others.

My condolences and prayers towards the families of those affected, including that of the perpetrator.
May the souls of those who perished, rest in peace.

I read several Internet comments for and against gun control by impassioned people who are rightly outraged. Here is an article on Yahoo honoring the victims. There are tons of comments.
For those of you who are unfamiliar with the US and its laws, there is a certain part of the US Bill of Rights that is related to this discussion. It is the Second Amendment to the Bill of Rights that allows citizens to bear arms for self-defense.

Overall, the sentiment does seem to lean towards the idea that such crimes cannot totally be prevented as crazy people and criminals who are hell bent on breaking the law, always manage to get hold of weapons, legally or otherwise.

Gun advocates say that if common folks are always armed, there will always be some sane, concerned citizen in a crowd of unfortunate victims, who might fire at such perpetrators and prevent them from unleashing their insanity on the rest. That does seem like a wholly plausible line of defense.

On the other hand, proponents of gun control say that as long as guns are freely available, the chances of such crimes occurring are very high with a resulting high number of casualties. This is also true.

Gun advocates further argue that if guns were banned, violent criminals would always find other means such as knives, explosives, etc. So should we start banning knives? Given the worldwide newspaper accounts of people being stabbed every now and then by loved ones or strangers, knives are a very lethal weapon, too.

Their opponents say that there is no way a knife can be used to kill so many people at a time. I have to agree with the opponents on this one.

Extent of damage
A knife can cause as much damage as a gun or worse when held at close range. When it comes to operating in a crowd though, the situation changes completely.
Unless the attacker happens to be some highly skilled medieval-era-type warrior that can throw an entire array of knives at moving targets in quick succession with a high level of precision, the chances of killing many people in a crowd, who are running helter skelter, are extremely low.

Just take a look at history. How did some nations and cultures manage to subjugate others on the battlefield?  Superior warfare technology was one of the many factors. Of course, the history of colonialism and world wars is far more complex with lots of intrigue, backstabbing, infighting, spying and politics at its Machiavellian best.
However, advanced guns and modern artillery did offer some countries significant advantages over their counterparts.

Do you think an army of aboriginals/natives with poisonous arrows and spears would ever be able to compete against an army with sophisticated machine guns and cannons? Unless the army with guns were to be vastly outnumbered and showered with a sky full of arrows, it is extremely improbable.
There are some exceptions when native armies have outnumbered and conquered invaders largely with their traditional weapons but the reasons were better organization, formation and greater numbers as seen in this very informative Wikipedia article about the battle between the British and the Zulu warriors. Another related article is the armed Maji Maji rebellion in Tanzania.

Physics supports bullets far more than arrows.

When a large weapon such as a spear is thrown at a target, it is visible enough to be thwarted or avoided if seen in proper light. Also, there is a limit to the speed with which a human being can hurl any weapon with his/her bare hands. A bullet, on the other hand, is tiny and travels so fast that there is not much time to react. What the bullet lacks in mass, it makes up several times in its velocity, hence the total momentum of impact is enough to cause substantial damage.
And, if it is a series of bullets in a sophisticated and powerful gun, the chances of hitting targets at close range are very high with not much human body power needed.

Simply put, the number of probable casualties that can be inflicted with a gun in a short period of time, is significantly higher than with a knife or some other common weapon.

Unintentional casualties
There is another problem with guns. Even if one were to keep a gun under lock and key in one's house, if a child were to accidentally get hold of it and pull the trigger, a terrible tragedy could occur. A knife, unless used to stab someone deliberately, causes cuts and deep wounds at the worst. A bullet, if it hits someone in a vital region at close range, can kill almost instantaneously.

Then, there are issues with irresponsible adults. Overreaction to perceived threats can cause loss of innocent lives. A perfect example is the recent Trayvon Martin case in Florida and the resulting uproar over "Stand Your Ground" laws. Check out this article in The Week for details about the case. There are some excellent blogs on this point elsewhere on newspaper websites such as the Guardian from the UK (sorry, can't find the exact posts).

Human reaction time
Unless a weapon is within reach and the victim has enough presence of mind, it may not serve the purpose of self defense. Imagine you had a weapon locked up in your garage and are attacked in your bedroom by a masked intruder in the middle of the night. If you are half asleep and the attacker succeeds in overpowering you, will your weapon be of any use?

Most crazy mass murderers succeed precisely because their victims are vulnerable, exposed and completely unprepared.

State laws versus private regulations
Secondly, even if the state or country of residence allows guns freely, a private institution may still have the right to ban them from its premises. Examples include religious and educational institutions.

Gathering from several user comments on Yahoo and other sites, that is apparently what happened at the Colorado theater. The theater itself had banned guns from its premises although the state of Colorado has not. Law abiding, sane patrons complied with the rules whereas the gunman who intended to cause mayhem, did not.
Neither gun advocates or opponents can do anything about this discrepancy. After all, we can't insist that a sacred place of worship such as a temple or church, be forced to let deadly weapons on its property.

Those who quote the Second Amendment must realize that freedom always comes at a price. There are people who will misuse their freedoms to hurt people and unlike free speech, the right to carry weapons comes at a much higher price.

Violent Crime, Law Enforcement and Deadly Weapons
In any society, there has to be a certain amount of trust in people if it is to be called a civilized and progressive one. If one has to constantly look over one's shoulder and be prepared to draw out a weapon, there is very little law and order to speak of. As much as people enjoy the Wild Wild West kind of movies, I don't think many people would want to be transported to that era.

There are a couple of scenarios.
(a) Poor law enforcement, strict gun control and availability of guns outside legal means - 
This is a scenario similar to tin pot dictatorships, nations with civil war and/or those infested by mafia or drug cartels. In such cases, the gun becomes the tool of oppression. Law enforcement officials are encumbered by niceties such as subpoenas, arrest warrants, lethal force only for self defense, yada yada, but the outlaws run loose, killing anyone who does not toe their line.

Would it help if common folks were armed, too? To some extent, maybe. Unfortunately, getting hold of an effective gun is hard for most poor folks especially where strict gun control laws exist.

I shudder to think what would happen if everyone had guns and there was lawlessness all around. Even the good folks might eventually end up on the wrong side of the law some time. Revenge and counter revenge might be the order of the day. You might as well toss out penal codes in the trash bin and tell the police to go home and find other jobs.

(b) Poor law enforcement, very little or no gun control and availability of guns - 
If there is a law and order problem in such a society, it would still be a mess. If general poverty is added to the mix, common people who cannot afford guns would still be at the mercy of those who do.


(c) Strict law enforcement, strict gun control and availability of guns outside legal means -
This is the situation in some US states. Law and order is generally good, calling 911 gets the police to the spot quickly and there is severe punishment for offenses. It is not that one can buy a gun just like buying a pair of shoes.
Law abiding citizens do not own guns but the outlaws do. Psychopaths and crazy killers manage to get illegal weapons and then go berserk. Guns are freely available in the country if one knows the right channels.

However, hardcore criminals such as drug lords and career hit men never go into a crowd and randomly fire at people. Their crimes are never without motive and profit.

The kind of shootings that have happened in Colorado and earlier in Virginia Tech and in Columbine about 13 years ago were not acts of career criminals or even jihadists. These were the actions of regular young people who were disaffected and disturbed. It is in such instances that guns cause more harm than ever.
Of course, even if there were no guns, these people might have done something worse, just like many terrorists do.
Neither the lack of guns nor their universal presence can provide complete insurance against crime.

Take a look at this excellent article in the Guardian on statistics about gun ownership by country. Wikipedia has a comprehensive summary of gun control laws by country, too.

There are crimes committed in probably every nation on earth but the extent and nature vary. It is extremely rare to hear about a disgruntled youngster killing random strangers for no gain unless he/she happens to belong to or identifies with the cause of some terrorist or militant organization.

It is not enough to merely devise systems to punish crime. Punishment can act as a deterrent for criminals without a conscience but the bigger question that we need to ask is - how do people reach that threshold when conscience is no longer a barrier?

Now, some cases have been traced to mental illness of the perpetrators. But, where do we draw the line between a pure act of evil and that  of madness? Isn't a complete lack of empathy for another human being itself the sign of a sick mind?

There have been debates all over on prevention of crime. MSN Slate had a fine article on combating such mad acts as a society. You may or may not agree with the premise but the discussion is worth pondering.

Just as a healthy diet, exercise and sanitation are needed to ward off disease along with life saving drugs, crime prevention must be employed along with incarceration and the thump of the police baton to have a healthy society.

Eventually, the overall culture, family and social constraints and individual morality are the best deterrents against crimes.

I am obsessed, fantasy and real world vigilantes - Part I

Over the past three weeks, I have been in a different world, the world of Lisbeth Salander and Mikael Blomkvist in faraway Sweden. I first encountered them when I started reading the third book in the Millennium trilogy, "The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest".
This book was purchased on my iPad one or two years ago but I hadn't gotten past a few pages before now. I had a lot of free time so I delved into it because I needed something fast paced and suspenseful. It sucked me in like quicksand!
Before I knew it,  I was torturing my retinas, trying to read faster and tried telling myself that I would put it away at a certain time of day but those promises to self often came to naught as I got more and more entwined in the author, Stieg Larsson's fantasy world.

Here is Stieg Larsson's site on the Literary Magazine of Swedish books and writers where you'll find lots of discussion forums and news about the author. Some people have criticized the quality of writing in the books on the site and there are even some controversial speculations that he did not write those books all by himself as mentioned in this New Yorker article.
I did observe that the style of writing was more in line with a daily conversational tone. There are very few words that one needs to look up in the dictionary if one's vocabulary is average, and swear words are peppered throughout the text.

Guess what, I don't care. Every author has his/her own style and I appreciate it.

There are authors whose prose is flowery and packed dense with words that an average person cannot make sense of without a dictionary. Take Thomas Hardy's "The Woodlanders" as an example. A moving, simple love triangle in English that is decorated with the English language.
Then there are novels densely populated with characters such as Gabriel Garcia Marquez's "One Hundred Years of Solitude" that spans generations.
These are not novels that one can breeze through but that does not mean that they are not enjoyable or mesmerizing. Boris Pasternak's "Doctor Zhivago" is another epic that I plodded through but it was well worth the effort.

Stieg Larsson's books may not contain poetic prose but they have well-developed characterizations and brilliant, plausible, tight plots told in an intensely suspenseful manner.

The Millennium trilogy consisting of the books with their English translation titles are:

The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo 
The Girl Who Played With Fire
and
The Girl Who Kicked the Hornet's Nest

The first one has recently been filmed and released in Hollywood and there are original Swedish film versions of all the three books. I have to yet watch the Swedish movies though I did see the Hollywood one. I thought that the Hollywood movie was quite true to the novel down to some of the dialogues with one key difference (that would be a spoiler). However, I am not sure how much a viewer who has not read the book would be able to grasp of the characters and plot.
The casting, in my opinion, was excellent.

There are articles about the popularity of these books such as this interesting one in the New Yorker magazine (same as the one quoted above). While all the reasons given could very well be true, I personally feel that one reason stacks up above everything else. Why are superheroes such as Superman, Spiderman and movies such as The Dark Knight so popular? Why are there legions of fans for Lara Croft or Xena, the Warrior Princess or Buffy, the Vampire Slayer? We, the public, seem to have an unending thirst for superheroes, detectives and even rescue machines such as the one in the popular Japanese TV series, Giant Robot.

Basically, we want the bad guys whooped, given a dose of their own medicine and even done away with for good. That's the reason Bollywood and regional films such as Tamil cinema in India can get away with letting their human heroes thrash a pack of villains even if they do not have any supernatural, science-fiction-conferred abilities such as those conferred upon Superman or Spiderman. As one of my friends would say, just suspend all logic and watch.
We may rave and rant about letting the law take its own course and denounce harsh punishments such as those enshrined in Sharia law but will gleefully watch Rajnikanth, that South Indian superhero that defies all laws of physics and aging in biology, bash up an army of hooligans with a single gesture.

There are films in India such as the Tamil "Indian" remade in Hindi as "Hindustani" where a former freedom fighter of the British Raj quietly sends corrupt Indian officials to the Great Unknown. The role was brilliantly essayed by the versatile thespian of South Indian cinema, Kamal Haasan and the audience faithfully added to the box office earnings.

The genius of Steig Larsson's books is that he has concocted a heroine who possesses kick-ass fighting skills that would be the envy of Jackie Chan, brains that would have sent NASA, the CIA, Google and Apple to come knocking at her door, the riveting personality and attire of a punk rock rebel and a horrible, frightful past that could very well last an entire season of "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit".  Lisbeth Salander makes the phrase "damsel-in-distress" sound like an antiquated fairy tale.

FBI Special Agent Dana Scully, played by the gorgeous Gillian Anderson, in the television series of the 90s and early 00s, "The X-Files",  was another female character whom I loved like millions of fans for her brains and investigative abilities, not to mention a quiet beauty that did not require any shedding of clothes to get noticed.
However, Scully as an agent of law and order, mostly played by the rule book. Lisbeth Salander would certainly equal Scully in her investigative abilities but doesn't even care if the rule book exists. Laws, common social niceties and conventions are not among her favorite things. She circumvents rules with impunity and yet maintains moral standards, somewhat along the lines of Robin Hood and Spiderman. She is no cute, popular  mainstream amateur detective like the pretty Nancy Drew.

Her unlikely partner in the adventures is the celebrity investigative journalist, Mikael Blomkvist of the magazine, Millennium,  hence probably the name "Millennium trilogy" for the series.

Together, they send serial killers and gangsters scampering for their lives. Lisbeth also has to save her own future. I won't tell you more, just read the books.

I may not agree with Salander's means or methods, but I still felt happy as she came out on top each time.

There was a New York Times article by Nicholas Kristof when some women in India took the law into their own hands in bashing up a serial rapist. I am sorry I could not find a free link to post. One has to be a subscriber to access this archived article but you can find references to it online. I found one of them here on a blog, Sepia Mutiny. 

What if the law fails miserably at protecting innocent people again and again? Would there be real life versions of Lisbeth Salander? I can already think of one case. Phoolan Devi, also known as the Bandit Queen and immortalized in Shekhar Kapur's film of the same name, was the victim of many injustices and abuse both as a child and an adult. She became an icon among the lawless and was later accepted into the mainstream as she surrendered to the authorities and subsequently entered politics. 

I feel that the public secretly loves vigilantes, at least some of them. If you asked someone what they thought of the electric chair for execution or the hanging method, they would probably say they are inhuman. However, the same person may have no qualms seeing a serial killer die a horrible death on screen. I am not generalizing, just saying that at least a few of us share this dichotomy of opinions.

All I know is that I was transported to a different world, just like my childhood days spent reading Enid Blyton's "Famous Five" and "Secret Seven" series. Hope you all enjoy Stieg Larsson's books, too.

I was saddened to learn that the author was dead even before the trilogy was published so there will be no more books from him. I was further impressed when I found that Stieg Larsson was a fearless campaigner against racism, sexism, fascism and exploitation. Read these touching interviews with his longtime partner, Eva Gabrielsson, in Vanity Fair and this interview with his father and brother in The New York Times. 

May his soul rest in peace! 

A brief hiatus

To all my readers,

Thank you very much for your time, patience, encouragement and comments.

I have been off the blogosphere a little bit due to personal reasons. I had been busy with relocation to a different place and have hardly had the time to relax, let alone put down my thoughts in a coherent manner.
However, my mind has been picking up signals and information all along and the thought and memory machines have been busy in the background.

I'll be back soon. Until then, take care and have fun!

Education, IT and Outsourcing - The US/India perspective

Listen up, there is a great post on TechCrunch about the great engineering shortage of 2012.

The article bemoans the fact that fewer students in the US now opt for careers in computer science at the college level but there are more drama majors. On the other hand, tech companies are still looking for great talent. Do read the comments for the article. They are extremely enlightening as to why some people simply got disillusioned with IT or that some others feel that outsourcing and the trend of preferring to hire young people have made the profession unattractive.

There is an interesting article in the Atlantic about the creative class in general and its rising presence in Asia (sorry, can't find the exact link). Here's a link to the author, Richard Florida's book on this topic. The creative class refers to jobs that require creativity, as you guessed right, education and skills. Jobs such as those in programming, journalism, research of any kind would all fall under this category. As I had posted earlier, these include professions of the head and those of the heart.

It is interesting to see how President Obama talks about out-educating and out-innovating everyone else in the world and about creating jobs here in America.  There is a discussion on one of my favorite authors and respected writer, Malcolm Gladwell's site about school performance and math scores in the US versus that of other Asian countries. This topic is discussed in his thought-provoking and brilliant, IMHO (in my humble opinion) book, "Outliers".

From my personal experience working both in India and the United States and having seen a fair bit of both countries, I have started to wonder if such a comparison is really an objective one.
I can't speak for other Asian countries but I can talk a little about India. Being a developing country that has traditionally valued education over mere wealth and power (wealth and power are of course important in any society but a well-educated, wealthy executive is likely to be more respected in India than a powerful, rich politician who is poorly educated), Indians typically invest in the education of their children.
One of the driving factors behind the craze towards IT and other intelligent white collar jobs is economics.
The standard of living differs widely between the classes as compared to the US. When I was much younger, someone once jokingly remarked that poverty in India meant living in a slum with no water or electricity or toilets or worse still, on the streets whereas in the US, 'poor' meant you could probably not afford a car.
Maybe the US was a more equitable society back then because looking at Occupy Wall Street and all its sister movements across the country along with people living off food stamps and out of their cars, not every American is now in that golden land where even the poor had access to basic necessities.

However, I still repeat - life in America for the average worker (someone who makes a little more than the minimum wage) is a lot better in at least some respects. One can still send the kids to a public school free of charge, buy groceries, have some cheap food, rent a decent apartment which usually comes equipped with a dishwasher, at least a common laundry room if not a washer/dryer in the unit, cooking range with oven and a refrigerator. One can buy used cheap furniture from craigslist or Goodwill and at least own an old used car. In short, basic necessities such as food, clothing, shelter, school education and even basic appliances that are commonly used in modern life are reasonably accessible.

Indians who are fresh off the boat in the United States typically covert dollars to rupees to cross check prices with that in India. This applies especially to certain items such as clothing, not items such as electronic ones. I have realized long ago that this is really not the way to compare unless you are on a short term visit and have no permanent income in the United States. Consider a television set, something brand new and cutting edge such as a Plasma or LED flat screen TV. What percentage of the average monthly income does this cost? The prices of electronic items have fallen so that even the average person can now buy a smaller flat screen LCD TV if not an LED TV at least during a massive Black Friday sale.
Ditto for laptops and touchscreen tablets such as Kindle or iPad.

On the other hand, let us consider the average Indian, someone who works in a factory or in an administrative job, not a hot shot IT professional or investment banker.

Renting in many Indian cities is very expensive so people prefer to buy property which means a portion of the monthly income has to be set aside to pay the loan. Most of the white collar jobs are concentrated in cities that are bursting at the seams with human population so even a single bedroom apartment in a far flung suburb of a megapolis such as Mumbai could cost you lakhs or even crores of rupees (1 lakh = 0.1 million and 1 crore = 0.1 billion, these are numeric units used commonly in South Asia).

One has to shell out all the money for appliances from one's own pocket as most apartments do not come built in with these. A car used to be a luxury even as late as the 1990s but with the introduction of cheaper cars such as the Tata Nano and more urban middle class professionals, car ownership has gone up significantly.
Public schools in India are far fewer than private schools and government schools have horrendous reputations (isn't that a paradox considering that India is supposed to be socialist and the US is supposed to be capitalist?). Gaining admission for a child to a 'good' school is getting expensive not to mention the need to save for college education. When I was a child studying in a private school that was government aided, I paid hardly any fees as the state government subsidized education for girls and also because schools that fulfilled certain government mandates could get additional funding. This may not be true for all Indian schools in all states.
On the other hand, a Bachelor's degree in the US costs an astronomical sum of money, especially if you send your son or daughter to a private University or an Ivy League school. Therefore, all is not hunky dory for a middle class family in the US either.

There are a couple of areas where the average Indian is better off than the average American.

1. Access to affordable everyday health care - Unlike the US, Indians generally do not need health insurance or even an appointment to see a primary care physician for a fever, eyesight or hearing problems or other common ailments. In fact, one can even see a specialist without insurance though they charge a lot. It is still not as bank-balance-draining as it is in the US. These are private practitioners not government clinics or state sponsored health care that I am talking about.
Owing to malpractice suits and the strain on the American health care system due to other factors, insurance has become a must-have and losing it when say, one is laid off from work, can be terrifying. Of course, one can buy insurance on one's own means but it is expensive in general.

2. Getting by without a car - Indian cities generally have good public transport as well as private providers such as auto rickshaws. One can walk to neighborhood stores and markets in many places making it a lot easier to get by without buying a car.

In general, the average standard of living in the United States is much better for someone in the middle/lower middle classes as compared to the same in India.
If you don't run a successful business, entry into the middle class and the ladder of prosperity are virtually impossible without education and landing a respectable, well-paying job.

After the formation and expansion of giants such as Microsoft and Apple and the need for computerization is every industry from banking to health care, information technology jobs have flourished and boomed in number.
The amount of code that needs to be written for large systems has been expanding and with it, the need for more programmers, quality assurance analysts and associated professionals such as those in management, marketing and sales has been burgeoning, too. Seeing what IT can bring into their lives, more and more youth have been opting for degrees in computer science, engineering and related fields and jumping onto the IT bandwagon.
IT offers jobs that give some scope for analytical ability and learning skills and thus the mental challenge along with pretty handsome salaries and a nice, modern office environment.
IT also gives professionals the chance to travel and live abroad, get acquainted with other cultures and enjoy a far better standard of living than in India. Even in India, top IT guys and gals have higher standards of living than probably the poor in the West.

However, this also means that many who get into programming or testing software do not do it because it is their passion. Bill Gates founding Microsoft, Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak establishing Apple or Larry Page and Sergey Brin birthing Google happened not because these people wanted to get into well paying, secure jobs with all the accompanying perks but because of their natural interest in computers and the passion to impact the world with their innovative products.
Of course, we have Indian techies who are knowledgeable enough to co-author books and contribute to online forums and tutorials and some are instrumental to their project teams abroad but there still remains a sizable number for whom IT is not exactly their calling.
What was creative, fulfilling work for the likes of Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak of Apple or Larry Page and Sergey Brin has taken on the nature of grunt work or drudgery for thousands involving fixing bugs, testing and re-testing and performing customer support tasks. Don't get me wrong, there are several who would excel at these tasks and even find them enjoyable but not everyone does and even an enthusiastic, intelligent worker may tire after years of repetitive work sitting alone in a cubicle for long hours.

Even in a country like India that values gurus and intellectuals to the highest degree, droves of young people started to march into IT and call centers while few became scientists or innovative entrepreneurs. The reasons for these are also because there are very few research centers other than those funded by the government and starting a business in India was not exactly a piece of cake even a decade ago.
Wonder what would happen if more Indians started to follow the current mantra of the developed world - Do what you love?
Would outsourcing be the same then? Maybe some other countries would step into India's shoes...
We do not know.

Conscious capitalism, Indian entrepreneurs and an awesome well-known Indian blogger

For a long time now,  I have been following the blog, Youthcurry, of a famous Indian blogger and author, Rashmi Bansal.

This is a blog about youth affairs, trends, education and careers. Opting out of the science-stream-engineering-medicine rat race of the Indian educational system at a young age, she majored in economics instead and went on to graduate from the prestigious Indian Institute of Management at Ahmedabad, also known as IIM A, one of India's top business schools.

Again, instead of merely continuing to climb the corporate ladder and drawing a hefty pay check, she went on to launch her own magazine - JAM (Just Another Magazine), a youth magazine.

Besides maintaining a popular blog, she has also authored three books on Indian entrepreneurs. Some of them are social entrepreneurs who have launched ventures that benefit the poor or further the cause of education.

Now, she has a new book coming out on Dharavi, nicknamed Asia's largest slum, located in Mumbai, India, titled - Poor Little Rich Slum. There is a great article on Dharavi in the National Geographic magazine here.

Ever watched the movie - Slumdog Millionaire? Well, coming from Mumbai, I know that slums are not just about poor, helpless people. Dharavi residents work and run businesses and their children go to school just like other people living in comfortable, legitimate apartments and houses.
The poor there aspire to a better life, too, and, in fact, Dharavi is known for some of its economic activities. For example, while I was still living in Mumbai, I knew that Dharavi had a famous road side leather goods market where one could buy leather jackets and the like before embarking on a trip to colder climes in America or Europe.

It would be interesting to read this book.

Entrepreneurship in India was lesser known in the past, confined to only the sons (and occasionally daughters) of families who were traditionally into business. There was even a stereotype that only Indians belonging to certain ethnic groups, such as the people who were natives of Gujarat (Gujaratis) or Rajasthan (Marwaris, one particular sub group from the state) had a knack for it.
Now, Indians are gradually waking up to the fact that one can do one's own thing and be successful and, better still, create jobs for other people and even make a difference in the lives of the less fortunate.

Meanwhile, I checked out the websites of some of her other books and it has been absolutely fascinating and inspiring. I lost myself in the stories of the people featured in her books and received a jolt of enthusiasm from it. Do check them out here:

Stay Hungry Stay Foolish

Connect the Dots

I Have a Dream

I popped in on a site called Goodreads to check out the page on her third book and was pleasantly surprised to see a lot of new books featured on the side bar, both fiction and non-fiction, penned by budding Indian authors.

This is another thing I admire about America and was struck by, during my initial years here. I was fascinated by the number of books that were being written by all sorts of people from journalists to professors and even politicians and how they promoted their books on various news channels such as Fox News, CNN, etc.
And, of course, American entrepreneurship. In my previous post, I had talked about the things that I was struck by when I came to the US. This is a key point.
In America, as a general observation, individuals do not wait for the government or some external entity to make changes in their lives. They start their own ventures, get organized as a community and take action.

When I lived in India, there was a columnist I followed very avidly in the Times of India, the economist, Swaminathan S Ankalesaria Aiyar. Having no educational background in economics except for a basic, introductory course in just one semester during my degree program, I learnt about terms such as 'trickle down effect', 'free market economy' and 'protectionism'.

India only started liberalizing its economy and allowing foreign direct investment in the early 1990s so we were a little late to the game. Foreign goods were looked upon as a luxury and were sometimes smuggled into the country. All this encouraged corruption.
Of course, there were big corporations that are British or perhaps a combination of British and Indian in origin that have been around since the days of British rule, for example, Britannia, Cadbury (now acquired by Kraft Foods) and Hindustan Lever (the Indian arm of Unilever).  The American giant, Johnson and Johnson, opened shop in India after independence in 1957. However, it was extremely difficult for newer companies from other countries to enter and directly do business in India.

Mr. Swaminathan Aiyar asked the question (paraphrasing is all mine) as to why should India only be afraid of being overrun by foreign corporations. Rather, why couldn't Indian companies compete and stand tall with them? This has certainly proved true.

Recently, Ford sold its Jaguar division to Tata, an Indian company. The Indian steel magnate, Lakshmi Mittal, founded a company that took over Arcelor and is now one of the world's largest steel companies, ArcelorMittal.

There was a time when there was a certain amount of paranoia against foreign companies. Today, American companies such as McDonald's, KFC, Pizza Hut, Domino's Pizza, Subway, Kellog's, General Motors, Ford, Coca Cola and Pepsi, to name a few, have a major presence in India along with Japanese, German, South Korean and British biggies such as Toyota, Volkswagen, Hyundai and Vodafone.

Although India was never a Soviet-style Communist economy, it wasn't the open, all out capitalist economy that the US is. Over the last two decades and more, India has been embracing more free-market economics and capitalism. Ordinary Indians, besides just being consumers, are waking up to the potential that increased competition and economic opportunity bring.

There is another side to capitalism besides the large corporation that kills all the Mom-and-Pop businesses and cares more about its bottom line than workers. Not all large corporations are devoid of responsibility and concern for their workers and other staff.

Capitalism, in its benevolent form, has the potential to transform society in a very positive way. I call this conscious capitalism, borrowed from the term 'conscious living' from many spiritual movements and one of my favorite personal development gurus and bloggers, Steve Pavlina. Companies think about their impact on the environment, their employees and society at large and act responsibly like a good citizen, even going beyond the bare minimum expectations at times.

Small businesses offering some unique products that are more environment friendly and affordable, can command a market share, too. One sees this a lot in the green products area. In the US, some of these products such as eco-friendly, natural cleaners and cosmetics, have spilled over the shelves of specialty stores such as Whole Foods into regular departmental stores. One such brand is Seventh Generation Inc. which now has natural antibacterial cleaners and cleaning wipes, even infant diapers and baby wipes.
A lot of local, environment-friendly, biodegradable baby diaper companies such as gDiapers, are now gaining a market niche in the presence of heavyweight brands such as Pampers and Huggies.

As for dairy and other food products, local is the new powerful. There is something so comforting about knowing that your milk comes from local farmers that send out their cattle to peaceful pasture with lots of fresh air and sunshine and without pumping them with hormones, that many of us tend to prefer that over some big name dairy brand.

Then, there are the socially conscious companies such as Toms that donate shoes and other items to people in need. In fact, Toms donates a pair of shoes for every pair purchased! Take another example, Zappos, that motivates its employees including call center workers, giving them freedom to grow and perform their jobs without treating them like assembly line robots. Check out their corporate culture on Zappos Insights.

Imagine if every country in the world embarked on a path of economic freedom for its citizens and created opportunities. That would probably mark an end to global poverty and underdevelopment, needless wars and destruction...

As the famous John Lennon song goes - Imagine...

Nationality - Lines on the earth, lines in our minds - I

This train of thought has been inspired by various personal observations over the years, news from various media, politics and some novels.

The English Patient - One of the chief characters, Count Ladislaus de Almasy, considers himself a man without national boundaries

The Namesake - a touching story of an Indian immigrant family in the United States

(Both of the above novels have been made into acclaimed movies)

and a subscription mail from another blogger who decided to become a US citizen.

Those of us who have lived in more than one country, called more than one place home, know exactly the pull of different directions on our hearts - from the country of birth as well as our country of 
residence.


The First Few Years, Initial Impressions of the United States of America

When I initially landed in the United States, I was floored by the neatness and systematic nature of everything - right from the roads to the malls, restaurants, parking lots and the disciplined sense of traffic on clearly marked lanes. I marveled at the planned manner in which even interstates had numbers and cities/attractions, exits and rest areas were clearly marked and the way driving tests were administered. The absence of corruption from everyday life was a great source (and still is) of admiration.

This is the honeymoon phase. The phase when everything around you seems bathed in a halo of light from paradise. I am not saying that I was so gullible as to believe that there was no crime or poverty or any other problem in the US (after all, I had seen television documentaries on serial killers in America).

However, in general, the attitudes of people and their way of life were, and still are, enchanting.

For the record,  I come not from some podunk, underdeveloped Third World area but from a bustling metropolis, Mumbai, in India. This is a major Asian city and sea port, complete with the stock market, Bollywood, fashion, Miss India contests, newspapers and publishing, banking and corporate offices of a number of companies spread out across various sectors.

Mumbai represents the microcosm of what America represents to the world. People come here (and to other Indian cities such as Bangalore) in search of opportunity, which, in turn, will propel them towards greater personal freedom.

Young graduates from smaller towns come here in search of jobs and get exposed to people from other parts of India, the latest fashions, restaurants, coffee shops, even nightclubs and also sometimes meet their significant other, rather than just stay home in their small towns and settle into an arranged marriage.

Unlike small towns, people have the freedom to dress as they please without being ogled at or sometimes even harassed and live without caring all the time about what the neighbors will think of them.

Disposable income enables them to buy everything from cell phones to television sets and if they earn enough and invest wisely, a flat and a car.

I guess this may be the case with many big cities in the world.

Yet, apart from the malls and McDonald's outlets, there is still a sense of chaos and dirt in Indian cities. Due to overcrowding in cities where people in white collar jobs have to absolutely reside if they wish to move up in their careers, pollution, traffic and waste choke the joy out of a daily peaceful existence. Most have to endure long, harrowing commutes in jam-packed trains and buses or inhale toxic fumes on snail-paced busy roads, leaving little time or opportunity to enjoy nature and outdoor activities.

There is a sense of everything being difficult, some of it due to facts, and I suspect some of it being due to perception, from registering to vote to paying a traffic ticket to, heck, driving from place A to B or finding a clean restroom where there are no malls and fancy restaurants or coffee shops. I had written about the blessing of malls in this respect a few years ago in this post, "Malls and Loos".
Some other bloggers such as Rajeev Srinivasan had mentioned the relative difficulty of daily life in India (sorry, can't find the exact blog post).

And, no matter where you live in India, I still cannot escape the feeling that there is a stifling lack of individual freedom. This is not due to legal or constitutional factors. It is a social construct that has been passed from ancient times but has, of course, changed and become more liberal with modern times.

However, the pressure to marry a person approved by one's parents at the right age, or dressing in a certain manner, or finding a secure job, still remains.

The difference is that younger Indians are more likely to aggressively pursue higher education and a well-paying job and they are also more open to travel, luxury, eating out and the pleasures of life as compared to past generations.

There is also idealism in them as seen by the reaction to Anna Hazare or the candlelit vigils demanding justice for Jessica Lall.

There are also more love marriages, especially in urban areas and Indian models and designers have carved out a niche internationally.

Okay, I have summed up some of the positives and negatives of living in India, not from a superficial, touristy stand point, but from the perspective of the average, aspirational citizen.

                    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Now, onto the land of the free and the home of the brave as the US National Anthem goes...

America always held a strange appeal for me when I was younger but I never really thought that I would make it my home. Reading about the various interdisciplinary fields and research opportunities in US universities in my Saturday Times of India,  I was fascinated by the fact that one could combine one's interests in different fields, pursue an area of interest not just for the money and expand one's horizons in so many ways. I had a vague sense of America being the land of opportunity.

I had heard about the 'dignity of labor' in America, about how a student at a top college could work as a waiter or dishwasher in a restaurant and not think of such work as below him or her or be perceived by others as somehow inferior.

I knew little about American society or American politics except that they had a different kind of democracy from India's, and that it was a lot more socially liberal than India, just like other 'Western' countries.

It is funny how we lump all Western countries into one and all Eastern countries into another, and, perhaps, African nations, Middle Eastern nations, etc., not realizing the various nuances and glaring differences in their political systems, economies and cultures.

We did study a bit about the American War of Independence and The Declaration of Independence in high school and chapters pertaining to slavery and works by Mark Twain (if I remember correctly).

And popular culture in the form of Hollywood movies, TV series and American novels such as Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys, Tom Sawyer and Huckleberry Finn and Archie comics were part of my life.

Coming from an English medium educational background, adjusting to life in an English-speaking country was fairly easy, barring the initial difficulty in understanding the American accent as opposed to India's British English and pronouncing words in a way that the average American did not go, "What's that?"

Note, for example, the difference in which the word, 'mandatory' is pronounced in the US and outside.

Or the more well known 'schedule' pronounced with an 'sh' in British English and 'sk' in American English.

Or the noun form of 'record'. The Brits pronounce both the noun and verb form in a similar fashion whereas the Americans pronounce the noun form differently. You can refer to Dictionary.com for phonetic details.

Americans also roll their 'r's a lot more and soften their 't's as compared to the British.

There is also the difference in spellings between US English and British English such as 'traveling' (US English) and 'travelling' (UK English) and 'honor, flavor, color, tire' (US) and 'honour, flavour, colour, tyre' (UK). US English does not differentiate between the verb and noun forms of 'practice' so there is no verb, 'practise'.

The linguistic adaptation was relatively easy as compared with someone not fluent in English. Overall, the American manner of everyday speech is simple and easy to understand and I felt, even somewhat casual.

One of the facts that strikes you the most is the adherence to law and order and rules here.

People generally follow the rules, whether it is stopping at a 'Stop' sign (trust me, I hadn't seen Stop or Yield signs in India with their transnationally understood octagonal and triangular signs respectively or even heard of them), or signaling to change lanes or dumping garbage in the designated bins.

Live and let live

These are minor when you compare it to the big issues that can really make or break a democratic society.

For example, a person who has never traveled out of a developing or underdeveloped nation or a country with strong religious factions may believe that all Westerners are ultra liberal and do not care much for personal morals such as dressing modestly or respect marriage or religion.

While it is true that one can generally wear what one wants and live with whoever one pleases, America has rules and cultural taboos, too. For example, one cannot streak across the street naked unless you are at a nudist beach and, in the past, most people disapproved of homosexuality. Even today, there is a section of the population for whom homosexuality is a strict no. In general, people have become more accepting of different sexual orientations and even alternate relationship models such as polyamory.

Premarital sex and living together before marriage used to be more of a taboo long ago. And, yes, cheating on your partner and having extra-marital affairs is not cool anywhere.

Did you know that both adultery and homosexuality were punishable offenses in the US a few decades ago and adultery is still so in some states as shown by this Wikipedia article? As for India, there are some archaic laws regarding adultery dating back to the Victorian era probably because no one bothered to amend the Constitution or penal code. Thanks to the efforts of India's progressive citizens and the judiciary, some of them have been repealed, for example, the law against homosexual acts was repealed in 2009.

True, there are stray incidents in the US such as violence against gays. The Mathew Shepard story is one such example. Sometimes, gay teens still get bullied in school and this has led to some tragic suicides.

For all its liberties, America has a right wing, too. 

Women who sleep around are still called 'sluts' and 'whores'. The right wing radio pundit, Rush Limbaugh, got into a lot of hot water after he referred to women using contraceptives as 'sluts'.

And, when strip clubs were opened in some parts of America, there was opposition from the more traditional populace. Today, the grounds for opposition are less clothed in morality and more related to matters such as fears of a higher crime rate as seen here and here.

The difference, though, is that in America, you just can't break the law and get away with it. You will get prosecuted within a reasonable time frame. If citizens do not agree with a law, they campaign against it and work to overturn it. 

Secondly, you can say what you want. The left and the right wing make all sorts of comments but no one can haul you to court because everyone accepts that free speech is sacred. You can yap all you please, but if other people stop talking to you after that, it is your problem.

What I truly admire about the American people is that everyone here is left in peace to live their lives as long as they are not breaking the law. 

Compare that to India where we have a gem of a Constitution and probably most if not all the liberties enshrined in the US Constitution (archaic laws related to homosexuality and adultery were/are still unfortunately on the books passed down from the days of the British Empire) BUT in practice, any political party can run amok.

The main difference between India and the US is not the spirit of the law, rather, its implementation.

Over the last few decades, we had right wing parties such as the RSS and Shiv Sena and their affiliates or emulators telling girls they should not wear jeans and go to night clubs, sometimes physically obstructing business establishments, without any regard for individual rights. 

What is even more depressing is that many Indians actually support such actions in the name of defending Indian 'culture'. Culture can never be forced down anyone's throat and democracy can never mature and progress without individual liberty. Most importantly, cultures change, they evolve.

What such parties do not understand is that Indians living abroad maintain their culture and traditions very well. For example, many of us wear cute tops, jeans and skirts and occasionally go to clubs here but also celebrate Navratri and Diwali and wear salwar kameezes and bindis and host Indian dinner parties complete with samosas, gajar ka halwa and medu wadas. Heck, there are Indian associations for various linguistic groups such as Tamil Mandrams, Malayali Samajams and Maharashtrian ones.

Some Indians actively participate in classical music recitals and Bharatnatyam performances, too. Indian maestros tour the US and other countries, attracting a loyal fan following.

The sheer ease of daily life  

Daily life is just too easy in the US if you compare it with India. Consider renting an apartment. In America, you look it up on the Internet, talk to the apartment office, take a tour, sign the lease and make whatever payments are necessary. You'll get your own space complete with dishwasher, stove, refrigerator, running water, electricity, a decent bathroom, mostly even a washer and dryer. 

Call the cable company for your Internet and TV and you are ready to settle in.

In India, well, life is a little more complicated. True, you have real estate agents and local cable operators who are kind of middlemen rather than service providers but, sometimes, you have to haggle with them and you don't get so many amenities in a flat.

There are places where you still have water cuts, power cuts and all those little hassles.

And, there are some apartment complexes or housing societies as they are called, where the neighborhood Aunty or Mami (Tamilian for Aunty) will certainly raise a storm or at least her eyebrows if there is a group of single guys wanting to rent out a place in close proximity to their teenage daughters. 

Ample space and scope for leisure 

As the Master Card ad says, there are some things that money can't buy. Clean roads, tree-lined boulevards and local parks for walking, bicycling and just enjoying the company of nature are available virtually all over the US. To add icing to the cake, there are umpteen avenues for recreation and sports ranging from skiing to kayaking and skydiving.

Unfortunately, India needs a lot of work done in the civic area. I remember visiting the posh Juhu neighborhood of Mumbai where a lot of Bollywood stars live in their outrageously priced homes. Guess what, the choking traffic and streets so crowded that you would have to have serious maze-navigating skills, are the same as in the poorest localities.

Smaller towns are not faring much better either. Streets are shared by everyone from pedestrians to hawkers and trucks and there are very few well-maintained outdoor spaces.


The existing noise pollution is compounded by festivities during Indian religious events such as Navratri, Ganesh Chaturthi and Deepavali, to name a few major ones, not to mention secular events such as elections, weddings, etc.

                                                                      Fall in the US 

                                                    The green countryside in Southern India


Sorry, I don't have pictures of the busy streets in Indian cities that I can share in public.

Women and work

You can do a lot of things as a woman here. You'll find women in hardware stores such as Home Depot or driving trucks and public transport buses or even working as cable company service people. 

Women can technically do everything in India, too. I have seen girls working in gas stations and factories back home, too. It is just that there is more of a general sense of safety and opportunity in US society.

Individualism and a plethora of stars and entertainment

I remember reading in my civic classes about the founding values of the US - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. 

Individualism is celebrated in America. The average person's contributions are highly valued. I had seen a trend in the Indian media, particularly in the 90s and early 200s, of glorifying only some individuals, be it certain Bollywood actors or cricket stars. 

Open a mainstream US newspaper and one will not find much celebrity talk at all. On the contrary, I was pleasantly surprised to read about teachers, gardeners, local heroes and such.

There are tons of actors, models, athletes, pop stars and other celebrities that are featured in magazines. Individuals from other walks of life get their limelight, too. Lots of people are well dressed, made up and are shown to be pursuing their dreams.

In short, you won't see only the same stars talked about day in and day out. There is a huge variety. India also has its chefs, fitness experts and athletes who are not from cricket. It is just that their volume in the US is staggering.

When it comes to movies, I was excited to discover different types of movie channels and channels exclusively dedicated to food and travel. There are stars in all these areas - chefs, physical trainers, adventurers and TV hosts.

Of particular interest to me were the movie channels dedicated to true stories and mysteries and I also watched a little bit of science fiction. 

India has a multitude of TV channels, too. What is more, we have TV series and movies in multiple languages. What I am talking about is the type of movies and entertainment, the genre, not the number.

The average person in America is aspirational. Uniqueness is welcomed. What I have felt after living here is the opening up of a wide range of possibility inside me. The 'do what you love and find your niche' mantra circulates in some form a lot.

As an individual, I now have both India and America in my psychological make-up and life path. 

Immigrants change a country and their chosen land changes them, too. I think immigration changes the land of birth, too, if significant numbers start emigrating. Maybe it is not just emigration but the forces of economics and global politics that cause the change but the diaspora of any country can have a very positive impact on it.

More to come in Part 2...

My sincere thanks to Wikipedia for all the information that I have linked to, along with some news and other organization sites.