Saturday, May 17, 2025

The Few Students Who Made Teaching a Pleasurable Task for Me

 

The Few Students Who Made Teaching a Pleasurable Task for Me

I taught courses in structural engineering, both undergraduates and postgraduates, and also the basic course in applied mechanics in a private “Deemed-to-be University”, in its School of Civil Engineering. Over 20 semesters, teaching perhaps as many as 2,500 students, I could count on the fingers in my hands the students who left a lasting impression on me. It is not that the others were non-performers. Yet, performance was not what I was looking for. Many of them were, but they, in my way of thinking, learnt only minimally of what a university has to offer. Indeed, at least two of the students topped their classes. They did not make my list here.  I am putting my thoughts about the special students here.

These might not have been the best students, as usually measured, unfortunately by the marks/grades they obtained. What made them special was they made themselves my tools for teaching the classes better!

Many books on applied mechanics follow the historical development of the field. The oldest of the old were geometers, they thought through geometry in their minds, plane geometry at that. Every semester there were eighteen sections of first year students who needed to be taught applied mechanics. Most semesters I took two sections and in at least during one I taught three sections, each of 60 students. And this girl student stood out.

Most teachers teach the subject in two dimensions, in x- and y-directions and use scalar operations, at the beginning and then as they approach the first test for internal evaluation, they give the subject the vector-treatment. I too do the same but with a difference. I teach the fundamentals of vector manipulation (only to the extent it is needed for the course, which truth be told, is high school level) first, and then extract the required parameters and how to manipulate them in two dimensions.

When I was in the middle of the first lesson using scalar treatment for problems in two dimensions, this student raised her hand and asked whether she could use vector analysis for such a problem. I was shocked. Of course, one can, I answered and showed her how to do it. She already knew and felt comfortable with it! My nickname for her (I would not reveal the name of any of the students I refer to here) was, “The vector girl!” This name stuck with her too, apparently. She sent her wedding invitation as attachment to her email with her covering letter signed, “Vector Girl”. Tell me, isn’t that a tribute for which a teacher would beg, borrow or steal? It came to me unasked, some seven or eight years later.

One semester and like a bolt from the blue, the university asked me to set the end-semester examination question paper (and also the brief answer for each question) for the subject Transport Economics. I was zero in the subject, yet I could not say no to the demand. The time available was about three weeks. I borrowed the necessary books from a colleague, and as I went through it, I could identify strong correlations and make sturdy connections between what is given in the books and the things I worked on in a project, the first ever Public Private Partnership (PPP) project in the road-cum-bridge sector in India−across River Hooghly in the northern reaches of the Kolkata conurbation. The books validated what I did earlier and my experience in the project enabled me to put meat into what I read in the books.

The examination was found to be moderately difficult for the students, the average score coming in at about 60-65%. I felt OK. The next time the course rolled around I was told to teach the class, and I was prepared. There was one student, for whom I had taken the I year course who kept asking questions to get clarified on many points within himself. Then, he found out that I had not studied the subject at all.

He knew I was qualified to teach structural engineering courses, which grows naturally from applied mechanics. I gained enough confidence in me to take me as his mentor, in a loose sense. This, again, would have been about seven years ago. Then, he calls me now and then to enquire about how I am and other regular stuff, and is always willing to try answering questions in mechanics. Yes, he does, though he did some post-graduate courses in Project/Programme Management and is employed by a bank! We talk for no less than half hour each time. To him, my best quality is, I believe, that I listen.

The next three students I am going to write about are all girls (now young ladies). To some extent this makes me think that girls are quite open minded and are not afraid of challenges. For the sceptical few, I love all my students irrespective of their sex (sex is biology whereas gender is grammar, for the uninitiated and those who feel queasy). They are students and no more.

Let me explain. I have a deservedly bad reputation among students, not because of anything I have done, but what other faculty members do. You get what you deserve, and I am extremely careful while deducting marks. If I erred at all, it would benefit students. Hence, students fail in their efforts to out argue with me for ½ or one mark out of 50.

Now, one girl student came to me and said, “I wish to do my main project under your guidance.” I asked, “Are you aware of my reputation that I give tough problems and I am hard to satisfy?” This was in her final semester and she has not taken any courses I taught. This was bold. She brought with her two other boy students who, I knew, were tail-enders in the class. So, this girl was not only aware of my characteristics but also of the two students she carried. That is doubly bold.

I gave her a problem that involved doing structural analysis using a particular software that had captured high share of the market. That way, the project could make her “Job ready!” I told her how to access the software, and if she had any trouble capturing the nuances, she could come to me; maybe she did once or twice.

The input was quite exhaustive but she did not flinch. And, I had a surprise for her when she finished it successfully. I showed the analysis of the results of a similar structure designed by a German consulting firm. I consider one of the eight managing directors of that firm my Godfather in the field. She is short; yet, she hit the roof and let out a loud, “Whoopee!”

I cannot tell you who, out of the two of us, was happier. She lifted up my spirits so high, I was floating cloud high.

She had two job offers, one from Amazon and another from the Indian Engineering Major Larsen & Tubro. I suggested that from L&T she can jump any which way, as I knew people who leveraged that experience in ways not many recognize. Yet, she chose Amazon, and is happy with her choice. The word I used is “suggested” and not “advised”. Students at the age of low 20s tend to rebel against “advice”, but are OK with “suggestions”. I guessed she was one such and she proved me right. Such students ...

I was hardly ten days old in my teaching job and a girl student barged into my room and demanded, “Where were you all these years?” with probably a scowl on her face. I was stunned and asked her to cool down and explain the situation. Until then I had taken not more than half a dozen classes for her, an advanced class on steel structure design that included some highly empirical design processes. I was wondering how I would handle that. One thing did help me: I had done my M.Tech project on the same, in 1977-78.

To come back to the topic and the personality, in the first few classes it was a method of design that was drastically different than what the students had learned in their previous design course. So, I thought that she had lost herself in the concepts that underpin the process, particularly the assumptions that are made in devising the design process. 

No. She was tuned perfectly to what was being taught. Her question was why I had not come to the university a few years earlier so that she would have had better grounding in the basics. That was a compliment given in a scolding tone, delivered by a student to a teacher. I could not have asked for anything better. If I remember correctly, she did have a doubt and I cleared it for her.

Now she is a family friend of ours. She is in San Diego, the US, with her husband and their six year old boy and she has longer conversations with my wife than she does with me! From a student to a family friend! Whoa ...

There is this girl student who sat in the last row and I could see only the silhouette of her face as it was back grounded by the bright afternoon sun through the window. But she made herself visible by asking quite a few questions and seeking clarifications and she had a classmate across the aisle who also pitched in. She was not an extraordinary student in the sense of maxing everything under the Sun, but a well-rounded one (I do not mean obese!); she was an athlete too, played basketball and volley ball, the two sports I am keen and in which I know my ‘x’s and ‘o’s. She must have done well in her seventh (or, perhaps sixth) semester subject I taught.

I marked her out as someone different but not special. Was I ever so wrong in my life? No. She is special.

Upon graduations she sought out a teaching job in a high school (a government school, if I remember right). She was with them for a couple of years and gained the trust, and more importantly, the affection of her students. Her life situation was such that she did not have to be an earner in her family. This gave her the freedom to engage herself in her passion, teaching young ones.

Then she switched schools and again was the centre of attention of students. I happened to be in Chennai on the day of her Wedding Reception (the eve of her wedding, as it is these days). I was sitting by myself and joined the line waiting to present myself to the King and Queen of that evening, with a gift in hand. She noticed me in that conga line moving slowly as a wave form and whispered to who I learned later is her brother. He came rushing towards me, accosted me (truly, like a constable grabbing the arm of a suspect) and moved me to the stage. I was introduced first to her fiancée and then to her mom and dad, and all were so gracious. The best wedding reception I had ever attended. She is in one of those North Atlantic countries (Denmark, but not in Greenland, Netherlands, Belgium ...I am very bad in geography) and I am still in touch with her. Such a friend she has metamorphosed herself to from being a student of mine.

I must end this with two other students from my post-graduate students, and both left me with bitter aftertaste.  One of them came to me for her project (as all the other faculty members had rejected her; I was not aware of this). She also had a job lined up for her in a college as an Assistant Professor (some influencer, of course; how cheap the post had become). After eight semesters of undergraduate and three semesters of graduate study, she knew nothing. She did not know how to spot a total of five points on a straight line going from point A to point B in space. I had to show her how by working it out in front of her. Anyways, the School of Civil Engineering did not care whether she passed or failed. So, she passed.

The other instance of a student who despite my demurring strongly, wished to work under my guidance, and I raked my brains to come up with a problem−one that teaches while being solved. For whatever reasons, she changed her mind and went to work with another faculty member. I would have taken this as her prerogative and that would have been that, if only she had shown courtesy to let me know her change of plans. She did not do that. Let me tell you that she was a wonderful student, really beyond a teacher had a right to expect. Yet, she showed no maturity.

Thanks for listening−I am telling myself−to bits of my history as a teacher.

Raghuram Ekambaram

Trumponomics or Trumpitis

 

Trumponomics or Trumpitis

An editorial page opinion piece that sounded like a Delphic Oracle appeared in the newspaper a month or so ago and I had made a mental note to offer my commentary on it, if only to myself. As I am getting into this activity after a self-imposed exile of about eight months, today is as appropriate a time as any for me to vent. Yes, this is not going to be a slimy, slithery, oily stuff; at least I am hoping it would be rather weighty, but only to the extent that the weakling that I am can lift.

It was, to set the stage, a harmful time for everyone except Donald J. Trump who had just enthroned himself as the king of the USA and his minions, all of them multi-millionaires and one who was then the richest man in the world. After that period none can argue that the US is a democracy. It could be called an oligarchy, authoritarianism, monarchy, madhouse, whatever else but not a democracy.

The management biggie’s piece carried a debate-inviting heading that blared that the arguments for what Trump was doing were not to be scoffed at. I will scoff at a few that I spotted as items to be scoffed at.

Can America not survive without manufacturing jobs? Manufacturing is second to services industry, and in the US, it contributes no more than 25% of what the services sector does to the country’s GDP. So, why the clamour for manufacturing? What exactly has happened now, quite precipitously, that Trump’s mind gyrates uncontrollably, like tariffs of 50%, 26%, 10%, 125% and 145% for China? Nothing. He wants people to see that he is doing something, anything, and that he is not asleep at the wheel, while the world makes his head spin. Do we need to listen to him?

Everybody who is anybody advises India that it should join the services bandwagon. Go up the value-chain, India! India did, and fortunately timely help came from the Y2K scare (do you care to remember that?). Services industry, in any form, does not produce zillions of hours of employment, nowhere near as it does to returns on investments (RoI). India’s turn towards services also produced wealth–for a few–leaving out many. This was named “jobless growth” and the Gini Index shot up. All that was in the past, but it continues to be in the present too.

Hence, Trumponomics, to focus on manufacturing, which is more like a disease, Trumpitis.

Trump is supposed to have said, “If you don’t have steel, you don’t have a country”. Yes and no. You can have a country and not have steel to the extent you need. Let us look at India. Its per capita steel consumption is 77.2 kg, and its production is 100 kg. Aha! We can have a country and we do, that is India! All round applause, please.

The noise subsided. The global average for steel consumption is 233 kg. India is good on the consumption/production ratio (less than 1.0), but fails miserably in the global consumption average. Consumption of steel is an indicator of where a country is on the development curve. India is low down, somewhere near River Styx. So, the comparison is nowhere near celebratory! Trump is less than a half-baked cake and those who quote him are, choose one from the list: idiots, morons, backwards.

“...free trade is not necessarily fair trade.” If the trade is not “fair”, the country will be taken to the cleaners. The US sells soybeans to China and buys iPhones (whose profit, at least part of it, is accounted in Apple’s operations in China, Taiwan, in the US and India too; some of it is accounted for in Ireland who can send only potatoes!) and toys (that makes a significant portion of Christmas sales, from China. This is all a bit confusing to me, and more so for Trump, it appears.  Trump does not seem to have heard about comparative advantage. You do what you do best and leave the rest to others.

The US has comparative advantages in many items of trade. One can lose such an advantage in one and gain in others.  Ironically, Trump had one comparative advantage when he became the US President the first time around. The Trump Hotel in Washington D.C. was right round the corner from the White House. He milked it. Did and doing the same with Mar-a-Lago. Per the article, we should pay attention to this serial law-breaking. I call it Trumpitis. No wonder Trump is against any regulation. This suits Elon Musk also, who is leading Trump by the nose rope.

The writer has not heard, it appears, prevention is better than cure. Prevent corruption of the rich and the richest now or suffer later.

“Nations park much of their foreign exchange reserves in U.S. government securities.” This is good for the US. Then, China seemed to take stuttering steps towards making its currency Yuan another reserve currency. When Trump came to hear of it, he went nuclear. Why? The reason is not far to seek, as investor sold US T-Bills, their yield increased (the interest the investor is assured at maturity). This is bad for the US; it cannot finance its accumulated debt as on date. This debt cannot even be dented by any level of austerity over even a couple of decades, whereas Trump has but four years (the talk of his running for a third term is all just that, talk). The writer conveniently skipped this basic understanding of global economics.

The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued against something that the writer wrote, “Tariffs will raise the cost of imports, ... reducing the trade deficit ...will spur domestic manufacturing”. The idiom goes, “One cannot push with a string!” Demand can hardly be managed through cuts in interest rates. I do not know whether the writer believes in the above, but his argument calls for pushing with a string!

The writer also agrees with Ayn Randian way of thinking: the economy is best left to the market, no regulations. Elon Musk could not agree more. His DOGE was doing just that, gutting and ravaging every regulatory institution, with Trump’s blessing.

I am going to stop here. What bothered me most about the article was the negatives of what the writer promoted were not even acknowledged. Intellectual dishonesty from the citadel on the mountain top.

Raghuram Ekambaram

 

Is one English from One English Tongue Intelligible to Another Pair of English Ears?

 

Is one English from One English Tongue Intelligible to Another Pair of English Ears?

It is a wonder that English, despite its severe deficiencies as a language has come to rule the world (almost). The trick is in accepting any all variations as legitimate. English people have great difficulty pronouncing words in other languages, but that never stopped them. Americans have a mongrel English that sits fine with them as well as the English people; not only that, American mongrel has become a pedigree! How about that!

 Thabo Mbeki, former President of South Africa, answered when his name was called out by either the English or the Americans, each in their own way. I am sure his name came out mangled enough that South Africans (his tribe) had difficulty recognizing that it was their leader the English or Americans were referring to. That never bothered the mouths out of which the name rolled out. My thesis is this is why English survived.

Mhatre is a common surname in the Indian state of Maharashtra. English people, and Americans too, aspirate the initial letter of a word ‘C’ (class, clear, communism...), ‘K’ (kleptomaniac, kind, kinship...), ‘P’ (political, partisan, people...), and ‘T’ (tooth, trend, try...) For the sake of pronunciation, if you added the letter “h”, pronunciation of ‘C’, ‘T’ and ‘P’ change unrecognizably. But, in Mhatre, the native tongue, by itself has added an “h”. What would the English do? Can do nothing! ‘M’ does not have an aspirated sound! They may make either the “M” or the “h” silent. No go. The native will not understand. Do the English care? No.

There was an Irish fellow in the apartment across the corridor. His name started “Cinn”, "Ó Cinnéide". “What?” I blurted out in all my innocence and ignorance. “Kennedy” he said. I do not know whether it was Irish Gaelic or English. They must, of course, be closely related and yet so different. There is no way one can derive Kennedy from Cinn... or vice-versa.

English language is arrogance personified. Perhaps it was justified a couple of centuries ago, Rule Britannia, but definitely not now, indeed for the past century when the US supplanted the UK as the definitive hegemony. It would be a hard stretch to Imagine, without the help of history, to think that the two Englishes are related!

But English even within the British Isles differs drastically, or even between counties in England and definitely between classes of people. Those who can recall the iconic scene in My Fair Lady and the lines  The rain in Spain stays mainly in the plain, and how the “ain” sounds differently between any two occurrences would readily agree with me.

When I saw the movie, I could not discern the differences but agreed that there could be. When I revisited the scene on YouTube in recent times the haughtiness of Prof. Henry Higgins when he describes the “grandeur” of the English language cannot but grate the nerves of speakers of all other languages. Every language, excepting none, has its own grandeur. What Professor Higgins said is the perfect example of combination of arrogance and vanity.

I had a Scottish mathematics teacher during my Ph.D work. He had such vague accent and pronunciation, and also used strange words and abbreviations that for American students in the class seemed as if he was speaking a different language. I caught on to him quite fast and the other students realized this when I asked questions in the class, because I understood his language but had doubts in the subject!

I wonder whether Daniel Craig took lessons in Scottish English before he was accepted as James Bond. He must have, as he was English.   

To answer the question in the heading, yes, any English rolling off an English tongue is intelligible to any other English ears that hear it, if not at the first instance but definitely over a few repetitions. English is like a creeping vine. You would never know when your walls are fully covered.

One concluding point: What English had done to most other languages, Hindi could do to other languages of India,

Raghuram Ekambaram

Traffic Characteristics have not Changed

 

Traffic Characteristics have not Changed

Retired life has its own charms. I get to read the daily newspaper in leisure and sometimes chance upon amusing titbits. The following is one.


Not only Indians, even the colonialists, the English did not care much for upkeep of public property or its use in a sustainable manner. Immediately you ask, how could the English done things “sustainably”, the word having come into regular usage only in the tail end of the twentieth century. If you notice the date line of the article, it is 1925 AD (BCE had not come into being by then), referring to an “English Act of Parliament passed in 1878”!

Therefore, as usual we are more than hundred years behind our colonizers. If damage was caused to the “highway by reason of ...” excessive weight or extraordinary traffic, “...the person by whose order such traffic has been put upon the road...” will be liable. It is not the driver of the vehicle or perhaps even the freight company but the owner of the cargo who has allowed or compelled the carrier to freight the vehicle more than the allowed weight who will be penalized.

The above in the English Act looks fair to me. In India, we are very ready to catch the small fish to let the big fish escape; just the opposite of what a stork does while standing on one leg in the water!

Raghuram Ekambaram

I Love Srirangam (Railway Station) During the Day, and at Night!

 

I Love Srirangam (Railway Station) During the Day, and at Night!

I live in Srirangam, a suburb of the city of Tiruchirappalli. There was a time, a few years ago, I made a pilgrimage to the station (I live within about 150 meters of its entrance) in the evenings of off days (mainly the weekend and other holidays) and walk on the clean platforms end to end, about 550 m. Six or eight lengths made a pleasant, unhindered, brisk walk of about three to five kilometres. I always paid the platform ticket (Rs. 10/- then), whereas some oldies who could have easily afforded the platform ticket stinted on even that minimal expense, only to sit on the seats provided for passengers, and talk about what−corruption! Go figure.

Then, some idiot had to write to the authorities of Southern Railway, if not exclusively about this station, Srirangam, but about a number of stations up and down the network. As a result, SR put a ban on people using the platform for anything other than getting on and off a train. My walk on the platforms came to a shuddering halt.


Indian Railways, to its credit made a special effort to modernize−passenger amenities, improvement of parking and circulating areas, improvement of the station approach road(s), enhanced station building facade etc.−under its Amrit Bharat Station Scheme (ABSS) and Srirangam Railway Station, a centre of religious tourism (even from as far away as Saurashtra, most of them on the way to Rameswaram and Kanyakumari) was a designated beneficiary of this scheme. The scheme is completed. To make it better still, a separate project for passenger lifts is gaining pace.

In this post, I am focusing on the “enhanced station building facade”. Above are two photographs I have taken of the frontispiece, two during daylight hours. Additional two under the lights are given later.

When I was working in a civil engineering consulting company that also had a good-size architecture division, for many proposals of buildings, metro stations, (we even did one for New Delhi Railway Station) we were asked to take the clients in a 3D walk-through. We prepared a detailed tour and could spot aesthetic blind spots that we corrected.

Please read the large size lettering that states the name of the suburb: Srirangam. There is something else ahead of the name, what is that? “I Love”. The “Love” to me is obfuscated severely for obvious reasons, except to a teenager!

It proclaims−where the “It” can mean only the station as no other authorship is indicated−that “This station loves Srirangam”, quite narcissitic!  Any sentiment on a T-shirt implicitly identifies the wearer as the subject or the object. Had the consultant hired by the railways shown a walk-through in the daytime, the clients could have noticed that the colours of the letters do not stand out.

It is hard to read the “I”, blue, quite dark, on a dark background, in the left photograph, and only a little more visible in the right photo. What I am saying, in brief is someone who approved the colour scheme was not an aesthete.




Look at the lighting in the front porch, which silhouettes the name, the bottom half of the name in a shadow, in the night!

 The lighting designer should have back lit each of the letters with an individual luminaire from the pedestal level to give each letter as a prominent shadow. Or, she could have given it from the front, in precisely the same manner, but highlighting the letters in bright light.

I am a civil engineer and I lack the sensitivities of an aesthete. Yet, I could see something as not aesthetic. Isn’t that a credit to me?

I like Srirangam. It is not precisely what I wanted to retire to. Yet, it satisfies many of my needs and some wants too. There are calm streets that carry a small town atmosphere. The marketplace is as raucous as it can be in any big urban centre. At some places, quite far away from the temple, there are gated communities! How about that!

Srirangam is a mish-mash with the past trying to live with the present, and awaiting a dreaded future. Religion anchors it, in space and time. I wish someone loosened these fetters.

Srirangam falls between the two stools – a city and a town. The traffic indiscipline reminds you of a large urban space. The vehicle population is more severely skewed towards two-wheelers vis-a-vis four wheelers. Public facilities, such as garbage pick-up are OK, as a town.

If it ever enlarged into an urban space, it would suffer from the urban debilitations. It is not so bad, on an average, except for the modernized/upgraded railway station. More thought should have gone into its planning and execution.

Que sera sera. 

Raghuram Ekambaram

Friday, May 16, 2025

There was a Bata (footwear shop) in Egypt in Moses’ Times

 

There was a Bata (footwear shop) in Egypt in Moses’ Times

On Mount Sinai, God orders that Moses remove his sandals because the land he is standing on is holy. Then, I checked. I find this practice is neither mandated nor universal among Jews when they enter a synagogue. God’s edict carries the weight no more than what a mother tells her child, perhaps even less!

Moses comes down Mount Sinai and tells his wife and Joshua (his sidekick) that he is returning to Egypt where death could await him. Moses is fatalistic about this. As a dutiful (?) wife, Zipporah (spelling per Wikipedia; the Old Testament in its many English versions must have a number of different spellings!) Moses treks back to Egypt, and there in the palace of the Pharaoh, Moses enters dramatically pronouncing that he comes from the “Kingdom the most high”, with a strapped pair of sandals on his feet.

Where did he get the pair of sandals from? From the neighbourhood Bata shop, of course!

The director must have pleaded with Charlton Heston to act barefoot, now that he had done it on the trek back down the mountain. Cecil B. DeMille was trying to save the cost of production. But, Heston would not hear of it−“Done it once, never again.”

DeMille went to Egypt located a Bata shop and bought a sandal of proper size. The above is a sub-narrative of the story behind The Ten Commandments.

There is more. Moses gets less religious the second time round, up the mountain. He wears the same old pair (DeMille could not afford another one), but does not recall God’s edict. Of course, he was emboldened after he saw the Pillar of Fire that stopped Pharaoh’s horses, and he was sandal-clad.

This post is what I consider film-appreciation. Take that, art cinema lovers.

Raghuram Ekambaram

 

What I Do and Don’t Like About the Hindi Movie OMG Oh My God

 

What I Do and Don’t Like About the Hindi Movie OMG Oh My God

I do not like the ending, the few last frames. It is so slimy, mucus like. While the movie raises the sharp philosophical question, “Does God exist?” the final answer leaves you fully dissatisfied. There was no answer; just as well, given the religious ecosphere that encompasses everyone except the write of the original, a Gujarati play.

“Fully dissatisfied, did I say?” That is, one can never be anymore dissatisfied. Where did the movie go terribly wrong? Only at the end.

The hero, played superbly by Paresh Rawal, starts out an atheist. He is, after all, a shrewd business man, perhaps more than he is an atheist. Does he come around to get his long lost ethical mooring back? Or, did he remain an ethical outcast? The movie is silent on that. I liked it. To be frank, I would have liked the businessman to go back to his old ways, the power of profits having the definitive sway! The truth.

There are scenes I would have liked when my age was in single digits or possibly even in the low double digits (pre-teen), now that their age cohorts are masters of trick shot videography. So, I was left to wonder why these shots were included. It would have been a decision based on RoI, a wrong one. The movie ostensibly had a strong message and these intruded into the story line to leave a visible scar. I would have been much happier without it.

“Total waste!” This one phrase is to be weighed in gold! Universal condemnation of religion. Wait for it, in a court scene. The event condemned is a twist (well within story-tellers’ right to imagine) on what we saw about three decades ago. My colleagues in my office went out during lunch time (and were delayed in returning), each pouring at least one fifth of a litre of milk on an idol of the elephant-God, Lord Ganesha, all based on a rumour that He is drinking milk and it spread like wildfire).  I wonder what I would have done had I been watching in a movie hall; perhaps brought down the ceiling! It is that good.

The chief of the religious cabal, played superbly by the veteran and celebrated stage and cinema actor Mithun Chakraborty in an impactful role, asks his congregation as to what God has not given them. Has He not given earth, water, air and all else that made their life so easy and comfortable (the dialogue writer missed mentioning air conditioning!). I did not feel comfortable as his questions went unanswered (of course, these were rhetorical, not to be answered), though the actor made that scene, indeed the role come alive. What kind of an effect could it have on impressionable minds (there are more adults than teens, pre-teens and younger ones put together in this category)? Further descent into Hell!

The TV interview scene is one I would like to store indelibly in my mind. The interviewer is asked by the interviewee−yes, upside down!−what did she do when she wanted to have a chocolate? Did she pray with prayer beads, kneel down and beseech her father, what, indeed, did she do? The interviewer answered that she just asked and her father got her what she wanted (was a lucky girl whose father did not worry how her teeth might stain and probably she would suffer later!). Then, the coup de grs by the interviewee: why wouldn’t you do that to God, after all he is a father figure.

At the end of the interview, the teenage daughter pleaded allegiance to her father when she acknowledged that who the audience sitting in a college cafeteria are appreciating was her father. Perhaps that was the instance she burst out of her cocoon, as I would have liked. This was a teaching-cum-learning moment, the managementese intruding into this write-up!

Three major religions were appeased by seating their religious heads in the courtroom. There is also a trickier aspect to it, the way I see it. Each religion was taken to task on its own terms. This way the three religious arrows that could have come in the way of the atheist were blunted even before they were lifted out of their quivers! Insult everyone and you insult none. A nice trick!

I could possibly pick-off a few more frames but that would test my patience as I get down to reading what I had written. So, I stop.

Raghuram Ekambaram    

The One Time Oprah Winfrey Stumbled, Perhaps Unawares

 

The One Time Oprah Winfrey Stumbled, Perhaps Unawares

This was some time in the late 1980s. Why am I raking up such an old instance? Old or not, unless corrected it perpetuates and repeats endlessly; hence it is a current issue and not an old one.

It is about the troubles women face during pregnancy – head to toe.  At the lower end, they cannot look at their toes or wear socks in winter, I remember Oprah telling the audience and everyone, including the men, agreeing. The problem with her argument arose when she tried demonstrating the significant burden women faces, in the later part of pregnancy, around the midriff. This post is this about that difficulty.

What was the demonstration? A big load of about the same weight as that carried by a woman towards the time of delivery around the midriff was tied to the midriff of a man. Obviously he could not balance it, and fell forward. A huge roar of laughter and “I told you so!”s.

I was at the university student centre and was watching the show eating some French fries, as I needed my regular fix of salt! The above were the gleeful murmurs among a number of female students having their fixes in front of the TV.

That was when I began my defence of the man, and many heard me saying to Oprah (as though she could hear me), “You are being unfair!” I did not elaborate how she was being unfair. This write-up is to put down my points on record.  

“Oh, my! Wearing socks is the least of a pregnant woman’s worries. Who is he to even point out the things Oprah said? He lacks empathy. Doesn’t he know that billions of women look up to her? Is he going to insult Oprah?” This was what I heard from the TV audience.

They could have gone further (and did, per my memory; also out of my ear shot), “He is an MCP. Leave him in the drain pipe, where he came from, to wade through!”

I am here to defend myself nearly four decades later and far away from the original scene of action.

A pregnant woman comes to bear that load incrementally. Her body adjusts to the changing positions of her centre of mass (weight distribution), again, incrementally, all through her pregnancy. In the demonstration, on the other hand, the man was asked to make the necessarily huge adjustment instantaneously. No wonder he failed.

Of course, the woman also undergoes changes in every other element of her internal systems. This the man can never experience. Therefore, it is prudent for the man to accept his wife’s statements at face value.

When I got married, the only condition I imposed on my then future wife was that I would not have any children. Do not even try to attribute any reason that you may be aware of onto my decision and demand. You would fail as the reason is far from being mundane, yet not spiritual. I see you scratching your head. Yet, no woman can even assess much less appreciate how empathetic I am to the travails of a pregnant woman. I am also capable, not from a doctor’s perspective but as an informed engineering professional with a fair taint of empathy, to defend my case. This is what you are going to see below, be warned.

My idea is rooted in issues half mental and half physical. On both these counts, a pregnant woman is given the time, even for morning sickness, to prepare herself gradually. This is obviously not so for the man who got her impregnated (to be deliberately crude about it).

The difference in the gradient (in mathematics, the change in the slope of the curve, as shown) between pregnancy in women and as “demonstrated” through a man’s weight gain should give anyone a pause to think. The slope is steeper, meaning the weight gain is more in the same duration for the woman.


Does a man gain weight during his wife’s pregnancy? Yes, if you go by the so-called “sympathy pregnancy” (Couvade syndrome) argument. I have accommodated this male weight gain in the figure, as the reader can see.

Oprah Winfrey, as good as she has been in bringing out the problems only women face during a pregnancy, seems not to account for the time frame, perhaps too long. If one looks at it in evolutionary terms, this longish gestation is a requirement for the survival of the human species. How is it so, think on this. Perhaps another write-up.

To conclude, in trying to dramatize what women go through pregnancy Oprah undermined the issue. One slip, though unnoticed, in a stellar career.

Raghuram Ekambaram

Jallikattu is not Bull Fight

 

Jallikattu is not Bull Fight

At the outset, let me affirm that I am not in favour of either, the jallikattu as practised mainly in the southern districts of Tamil Nadu and the bull fight in Spain. Yet, were I to be forced to choose between the two, I would choose jallikattu. The reason for my choice is that it is the sport (?) festival owned by a region in the state I belong to, Tamil Nadu. This does not make me parochial, far be it. My choice is my assessment of the level of cruelty visited upon the animal.

I am not a card carrying member of PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals), yet I carry an intense level of empathy for animals (not for insects!). This write-up is to make the distinction crystal clear.

First off, the tile is wrong. The bull is being taken by its hump, not by its horns! This appeared in an English language daily newspaper. The photo editor skipped a beat.

For the substantive issue, the statement explaining the photo got it precisely right – a “gutsy tamer”, and not a fighter as in Spain’s bull fights (a choreographed dance, it actually is, with three matadors, each taking on two bulls, culminating in the bulls’ death). In Jallikattu, the bull will be repeatedly irritated before being let out into the ring (an annual “celebration”). On this count I am not as much in favour of Jallikattu as this too is annual torture, not clearly more humane than clear-cut once-and-for all execution.

I am trying to be consistent across issues with a number of ifs and bu s. There can be no consistent morality for a human being, unsullied by her sensibilities. I will not thik twice before crushing a cockroach or a spider. I live with this cognitive dissonance.

Raghuram Ekambaram

Had Newton Not Been There, Could Einstein Have Been?

 

Had Newton Not Been There, Could Einstein Have Been?

This is a write-up, indeed a counterfactual rumination; Isaac Newton did exist and so did Albert Einstein.

This post is the direct result of what I read in an article in the Times of India many months ago. It said Mohammed could not have started the religion of Islam without the rise of the Roman Catholic Church and its head, the Pope.

So, I thought, how about Newton without Ptolemy and his epicycles ... Einstein without Newton.

I listened to Prof. Richard Feynman in an invited lecture delivered at Cornell University when he was a professor at California Institute of Technology. He started out with how the ancients thought the Earth was going round the Sun−a large number of angels flapping their wings furiously behind the Earth along its orbit around the Sun and moving it.

The clincher was when Feynman claimed that it could as well have been that way; the only error in that thinking was the direction the angels were pushing the Earth; this happened to be perpendicular to the direction in which the Earth was moving at any instant. The direction was radial inwards and not tangential; that is, over one full revolution the direction would change continuously, feeding on the information from the previous instant and the Earth would occupy the position in space where it was one year ago.

Just think on the above. Isn’t this the way of calculus, keep moving incrementally through a distance (or a time interval) till you reach the point (or the instant in the future) you wished to be.  Let me ask the question: which one did Newton expound on first, gravity or calculus? I cannot say, you cannot say, a historian might be able to say but I doubt it.

A historian could give you the date on a calendar on which Newton proclaimed the theory of gravity, and another one for calculus. But, she could not claim to have been privy to his mental processes that gave rise to the two, which came first, and at which point and in which order the last piece snapped into the jigsaw puzzle.

That was a slight detour, but I believe necessary in the context of this write-up. Many apples must have fallen on the head of many over the eons till Newton came and sat under the apple tree on that fateful day. Do we credit the apple tree for Newton finding out the mechanism for the fruit to fall? No.

Had the apple not fallen on Newton’s head that evening, could Einstein have come out with the Special Theory of Relativity? An unanswerable question, if ever there was one.

Between Newton and Einstein there were numerous scientist of high calibre, if not with his dare. In fact Newton was big on the corpuscular theory of light. Given that he was a bigger name than Huygens who said light is a wave, no wonder Newton’s theory took hold. Einstein put paid to that: Michelson and Morley with their experiment and the surprising conclusion helped pave the way.

Now, I come to what Newton was supposed to have said: paraphrasing, he stood upon the shoulders of giants who came before him that let him see farther than they could. This is a surprising statement from Newton in the light of what we know about his character, egotism (self-importance and arrogance). I doubt very much he would have given any credit to his scientific forebears, including astronomers.

Einstein actually seems to have ignored particles as carriers of light energy. That is, he did not stand on the shoulders of Newton. One could say that Michelson, Morley, Boltzman, Lorentz, Poincare, Planck, all of them gave a hand, without their knowing, in lifting Einstein. While I have no beef with Einstein riding in the palanquin, the other scientists were not palanquin bearers. They had their own palanquins. Where was Newton, in Einstein’s horizon? I do not know.

I read in my elementary school that Emperor Asoka planted trees on roadsides. I did not think much on this then, merely a point to be remembered. But, the meaning I give to that deed now is very different. The emperor, even while riding a chariot with an umbrella over arcing over him could see that the other travellers needed shade. This was to his credit.

History, of anything, including the arts, more often than not should be narrated through incremental changes. It is OK to stand someone up as the person who shifted the paradigm, but the new paradigm itself should be remembered as a collective effort, with credit spread around.

One last memory test−who was the third astronaut on Apollo 11 who merely orbited the moon as Armstrong and Aldrin landed on the surface of the moon? You do not know? Good, that anchors the point I am trying to make. Without Michel Collins, Apollo 11 would not have blasted off from Cape Canaveral.  

I end with the following: history is not a compilation of disconnected events, as taught in high school history classes. It is a continuum, high school students, already academically overloaded cannot be taught the continuum. Yet, a balance can be achieved to an appropriate level of curiosity of a few students, mentioning in the class, that the history of science is not merely who found out/discovered/hypothesized what, when they wrote about it (though there are a few instances of Eureka type of realizations, such as X-Ray and Marie Curie) but how things came to be discovered.

Raghuram Ekambaram

“Waiting for Our Evening Snacks”

 

“Waiting for Our Evening Snacks”

We have a lot to learn from waterfowl, particularly on how to be civil and yet be competitive, though not a cut-throat type of competition. A few days ago, I was at the Geethapuram Check Dam across River Cauvery in Srirangam, one hour before dusk; and, what I saw took my breath away. A line of long-legged waterfowl (கொக்கு)−not pelicans−were waiting to “catch” their evening snack, so to say.

There must have been competition among them for space on the crest of the check dam. But there was no ruckus, no fisticuffs (or whatever storks (கொக்குகள்) engage in when they are angry), no visible snarling; I am not saying that the scene was serene and filled with camaraderie; only that they did not show me their anger towards their cohorts that I could decipher.

Quite frequently one stork would take a short flight, go down– or upstream of the check dam and on the way back would locate a vacant space in the line and perch, or just behind, upstream of the check dam. No adjustments in the line to accommodate the returning explorer! No fighting for its original space! They are “waiting for their evening snacks!” Do we see this amongst ourselves, say in a queue, in particular, a temple? No. I have enough experience in this matter.

And, another scene, fish jumping up the small height of the check dam trying to get to its crest. Such behaviour must have been observed by fisher people, and precisely for an opposite reason, for the fish to reach further upstream and lay eggs to multiply! These are called fish ladder (you can see this in the James Bond movie The World is Not Enough, if not in the opening scene but in the following frames). This shows precisely the steps behind the predator-prey dance in evolutionary biology.

The blurred picture that I managed with my camera phone at the check dam explains what I said in the text. Please don’t mind as I could not get nearer to the scene of action. Yet, the photo supports the extensions of the idea of Evolution though Natural Selection. A learning moment, for me.

Raghuram Ekambaram

Force majeure and IPL

 

Force majeure and IPL

How I wish Pahalgam had happened three years ago. Do not get me wrong, I do not welcome war; indeed I am a pacifist, perhaps because I am a weakling, in mind and body. No, that did not come out right. Please do not infer pacifists are that because they are weak. I do not know whether I would have been one had I been more sturdily built and been mentally stronger. No point dwelling on counterfactuals; as someone said, “History does not reveal its alternatives!”

About three years ago, I kind of forced myself on the School of Management in the private university I was working to let me give a lecture to their students on contractual clauses. This was for infrastructure projects where the entity offering the concession is a government agency, and the party availing the concession is a private party. My talk was to focus on how the responsibilities on various issues are shared between the parties to the contract, particularly when the project was to be executed on Public Private Partnership (PPP) mode. Risk assessment/allocation/management was to have been the thrust of my talk.

I was well prepared (I had a then recently retired IAS officer, the Chief Secretary of Government of Odisha guiding me on this) and also had a PowerPoint slide showing a detailed table as to who (the government agency or the private party) on which issue carries the risk should something goes wrong.

Suppose the project involved import of goods, who would take the risk due to fluctuations in exchange rate is spelled out in the agreement, called the Concession Agreement. What if something happened that could not have been foreseen, and the project had to be stopped or at least delayed? Who would bear that cost?  This is where force majeure comes into play. All of this went over the head of the students (I am not even sure that even the few faculty members who attended understood). Perhaps I was talking at a level higher than to which they had been exposed.

How such a situation should be handled would have been spelled out in the agreement. This is where along with force majeure, IPL comes in. IPL was in a limbo for about a week, thanks to the terrorist attack in Pahalgam. The franchise stake holders (including Preity Zinta) would have been left hanging, and so would have been BCCI, the ultimate private party (for the uninitiated, BCCI is not a government entity; is the waving of the Indian flag appropriate in a match involving the so-called Indian team controlled by BCCI?) benefitting from IPL, not to mention the players.

No one expected that there will be a terrorist attack, but there it was. The SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) did not include this contingency. Everyone must have been flying blind, but hoping that the situation would stabilize. In double quick time, thanks to the ever ready armed forces and the political leadership, the situation did stabilize. Now IPL is back on track. (I am writing this in the afternoon of May 15, 2025.)

There would be a few losers. Four stadiums have lost revenue from a match or two that were scheduled in each, not including the knock-out stage fixtures. These would have been in Dharamsala, Chennai, Hyderabad and Kolkata.

Jaipur, not too far from the Pakistan border, is a finger-in-your-eye type of response, daring Pakistan. Yet, no matches in Dharamsala. Had India really wanted to throw a dare, Dharamsala must have been retained and that would have brought out the dimple in Preity Zinta’s cheeks!

Why no matches in Hyderabad, as inland as Bengaluru is, or more so? Why Mumbai and no Kolkata and no Chennai? Perhaps I should check the original schedule. No patience. Let that slide.

One more small point, fishing in troubled waters. The England and Wales Cricket Board threw in their offer to host the remaining matches. If your neighbour’s house is on fire, it is OK to light up your cigarette in the fire!

To understand the unseemly hurry to get the matches back on (to save money for everyone concerned, including the TV network), one has to turn the page back to force majeure. Everyone would have lost. As the scenario is unfolding, only the unlucky few have lost. That is good.

My having worked in an engineering consultancy company, being involved in a PPP project, and getting my feet wet on risk assessment/allocation/management enabled me to tentatively understand the whys of the IPL 2025 rescheduling. 

Raghuram Ekambaram

Thamizh Nadu – Rich Rural Cultural Tradition – Rekla Race

 

Thamizh Nadu – Rich Rural Cultural Tradition – Rekla Race

About three decades ago when my mother was on her death bed, down with cancer, on Deepavali night in Delhi, I tried sound-proofing the house we were living in with anything and everything I could get my hands on, including the quilt (except the one my mother was using). I was afraid that her heart might stop beating when she heard a loud sound from a cracker. My fear was not irrational.

I was then a newlywed, at the age of two months short forty six years and my wife was new to Delhi and may at best have known only a smattering of Hindi. She may not have understood what I was doing but was with me all through that night. My mother dying on us that night could have been the worst of the worst situations. None would be available to help out, any which way. Fortunately it happened only a month later.

The morning after Deepavali in Delhi is not for the faint of lungs. The smog (combination of fog and smoke) suffocates. I do not remember whether I was in a way thankful to the then Delhi government for curbing the noise level and also limiting the hours in which crackers could be burst. Yet, the whole population must have turned “boys”, and it was the usual, “Boys will be boys”. My thanks to the Delhi government, if I had offered, would have gone in vain.

In the next few weeks, when winter truly sets in and fog (and smoke from automobile exhausts) got severe, many in my office were complaining about smog. I was not one of them. The following is the logical train of thought that connects that winter in Delhi and the image below.


 The above is a picture from a newspaper showing what is called a Rekla Race (do not ask me from where this name came). This is a sport, a competition, in rural Tamil Nadu. How would I connect this to the Deepavali smog in Delhi? I will and my genius should be appreciated!

Bursting crackers is an age-old tradition, a cultural event marked prominently in calendars printed in India (the dates may vary by a day given that India has a long east-west spread, even if we do not take the North-eastern states into account). The reason the function is celebrated in the northern states is distinctly different than the one justifying the celebration in the southern states. How old is this tradition? Millennia, if you were to ask me.

My argument against the general feeling was the tradition is so ancient and has survived that it deserves to be continued. There is nothing intrinsically harmful in it, if ...

... people do not go overboard and create problems for everyone, including ironically those who create the problems. It is in the “going overboard” the problem lies. This shows that we do not care for our neighbours. A lack of appreciation of one’s civic responsibilities. It is also an issue of social competition, “keeping up with the Joneses” syndrome, of showing off your status vis-a-vis you neighbours, your peers in the office and others.

There is also the commercial/economic aspect; new threads, sweets for relatives, visiting them across the city (if one is unfortunate to have relatives living in the same city), gifts to your corporate clients (never to your subordinates!), to good neighbours, besides the crackers themselves! Growth through consumption model of development plays its part in such excesses. Lastly, doctor’s bills and medicines. Note that the function is asymptotically ceasing to be a religious function.

The Rekla Race fills a niche in the cultural calendar of people of rural Thamizh Nadu, could be associated with a temple. Here again, the “if ...” factor comes in. If only the competition aspect of the race is only moderately celebrated, and the fun aspect is highlighted, this should be OK with me, though I claim to care for animal rights.

Our pop culture items, to be precise, movies play a part in valorising these culture-based competitions. For example, in one movie the Thamizh filmdom Superstar Rajnikant wins the hand of a fair maiden, the heroine, by winning a Rekla Race in a village. Nowadays, a few movies pay at least lip service to animal rights by claiming that no animals were injured in the making of the movie (AI comes to the rescue). This is a good thing, but too little too late, perhaps.

Yet, my concern for animals does not make me hesitate to slap down a cockroach with my footwear. This is out of revulsion, not fear! Of course, I would willingly go on an African safari to come face-to-face (from inside a caged van) with a lioness (lions are tame in comparison) if someone can foot the bill. When I was young I saw the movie Hatari, and I still love the music and scene of baby elephant walk (the music and the scene still bring a yearning-accompanied smile to my face). I cannot be sure but I believe that the herd of elephants filmed for this clip were in their natural habitats doing what comes naturally to them. This unconfirmed belief lessens my discomfort, of course!  

We are, per our own vanity-driven definition, stand cognitively well above animals, and necessarily makes us distinct from insects (which, I think cockroaches are). This justifies the Rekla Race, the argument goes. I do not buy it, at least not enough to avoid a reasonably severe cognitive dissonance.

Again on the cultural front, I have, the Jallikkattu, an age-old bull-taming tradition in Thamizh Nadu that is somewhat less brutal than the bull fights in Spain. Yet, what I have heard about how the bulls are treated prior to being tamed repulses me. They are irritated to such an extent that if done on a human being that human being would become a mass murderer. Does my culture deserve this anvil around its neck? I would think not. Yet, as freedom to enjoy one’s culture is an inalienable part of one’s freedom, it must be allowed.

Yes, anything to do with culture has to straddle a divide; I accept, with an exception.

Religion. That is for another write-up.

In ill-defined moderation, crackers are OK during Deepavali; Rekla Race and Jallikkattu too are OK in the culture of Thamizh Nadu (perhaps nowhere else).

What is definitely not OK is leveraging these issues for political benefit.

Raghuram Ekambaram