The Limits of Punching Up in Stand-Up Comedy

Stand up as a genre has made a significant contribution in bringing politics out of its narrow confines of academic spheres and helping it reach a wider set of people. But this has been possible thanks to a change.

The following is an excerpt from the book Punching Up in Stand-Up Comedy: Speaking Truth to Power, published by Routledge. 

Humour is valued when it is perceived as cerebral or intellectually stimulating, something that is difficult to grasp and allows those who are humour literate to take pride in their intellectual prowess. However, when it comes to subaltern laughter, the erasure of the socially disempowered from the status of the comic, and thus the agent of humour, is part of a persistent historical narrative and a master game plan that has come to define the construct of the rational (and funny) man. Humour from below is seen as lowbrow and is equated with pure, unadulterated emotion such as the kind women, children and vulnerable  sections of the society display. 

The refusal to see the marginalised  as agents of humour instead of being the butt of ridicule, and “register the social power of subaltern laughter,” by dismissing their humour as mere relief is a bias that can be seen in philosophical and popular understandings of humour (Cynthia Willet and Julie A. Willet). Although the “diversity quota” (Aditi Mittal) of neoliberal markets makes room for a diverse set of voices, it does not recognise the political nature of comedy by women or “chick comedy” which foregrounds questions of identity and sexuality.

‘Punching Up in Stand-Up Comedy: Speaking Truth to Power,’ edited By Rashi Bhargava and Richa Chilana, Routledge, 2023.

Rebecca Krefting in her book All Joking Aside: American humour and its discontents has argued that all forms of humour locate itself in a particular social, cultural, political context. However, “charged humour” does it self consciously with the intention to create a more equitable world by challenging its divisions and cultural exclusion. 

In contemporary discourse, politics transcends the confines of statist, governmental structures, institutions and processes and incorporates within it individual and collective experiences, relationships and political subjectivities in the everyday. It highlights the existence of power dynamics within societal relationships both at the micro and at the macro level and the various factors that have a bearing on it. Stand up as a genre has made a significant contribution in bringing politics out of its narrow confines of academic, scholarly, intellectual and activist spheres and helping it reach a wider set of people. But this has been possible only because of the emergence of a new moment in politics as underscored by Sophie Quirk. As a communicative and collaborative art form, it can be said to address the gap between lived experience and power equations, ideology and representations in a society. 

Some of the contemporary female stand up comics across the world are challenging dominant views to question conventional hierarchies.  We can specifically look at female comedians in different regional settings be it the US (Ali Wong and Taylor Tomlinson), India (Kaneez Surka, Sumukhi Suresh), Australia (Hannah Gadsby and Zoe Coombs Marr), Italy (Marsha De Salvatore) or Iran (Shaghayegh Dehghan and Elika Abdolrazzaghi) who through their acts have deconstructed gendered notions of humour as well as patriarchal structures, worldviews and ideologies.

A stand-up performance is a people’s art, performed for the people. It is predicated on the performer’s connection with the audience by breaking the fourth wall, unlike many other modes of artistic expression where the performer feigns oblivion of the presence of the audience (Ian Brodie). The stand up comedian performing her biography through her performance might enable creation of community, celebration of creativity, orality/aurality and performativity in addition to critiquing structural (racist, sexist, ethnic, class, caste), gendered, cishet and (hetero-)sexual politics.

Usually the biography of a performer is established through her/his interviews, publicity material and more recently in their tweets and other kinds of social media presence which allows them to share their opinions in their acts and which may not fully be directed to entertain the audience. There is a performance of the self outside their “performative moments” which can be called their “non-comedic performance” (Ian Brodie). The socio-cultural situatedness of the content of stand up comedy and the comic persona flows into the realm of interpretation by the audience (face-to-face and mediated, both). Thus, it is not only the comic that establishes a subject position but also the audience who react to her/his jokes and may take hegemonic ideas, positions and narratives head on. Their laughter can be dangerous and jokes can oust misinformation, propaganda and rhetoric. One can say, the audience is not a passive receiver but an active agent and has the power to challenge the hegemonic and the dominant. Thus even if a comic performance may not necessarily lead to any drastic change, it can definitely be instrumental in busting myths, representations and ideologies and alter the way people think about the dominant and the marginalised both from within and outside. 

The question, then, is – is this kind of performance lucrative for the comic or does it always ‘land’? For instance, there are quite a few charged female comics who are successful but when it comes to long term success such as being headliners in comedy clubs, film, tv etc, it has mostly been men. While talking about the debate generated by Christopher Hitchens’ “Why Women Aren’t Funny” Krefting says that it ignored a seminal issue about the economy of artistic production and consumption and how we as individuals are taught to value certain things over others, made to identify with those in power and that identification promises material and cultural capital. Herein lies the reason why charged humour isn’t economically viable. 

Authorial intention is another possible lens through which we can further examine humour. There are times when the intention of a stand-up comic might not translate in the form of the audience reaction he/she was working towards. In such a case, the audience, especially the ones at the margins may make attempts and find ways to reclaim their subject positions vis-a-vis the stand up comic. The contemporary digital space does allow for such a process to unfold. For instance in a recent incident, a fan who identifies as non-binary called out Vir Das for his joke on the transgender community and stated, “you (Vir Das) of all people know punching up is how comedy works and yet you chose to punch down, if only as a set up.” To this, Das took full responsibility and responded, 

I did a joke on the new ten on ten episode that my friends in the trans community felt hurt by. I see why. My intent in the moment, was to say Trans people have courage the Govt messed up. It had the opposite effect and trivialised your struggle. Articulating my intent effectively is my responsibility, not yours.

This conversation, whose screenshot was shared by Vir Das on his Instagram handle indicates how digital space creates a space for dialogic communication and offers a glimpse into authorial intention or how sometimes the intent might not translate into the act or the  personal life of the stand-up comic.  In another instance, Aditi Mittal offers a caustic critique of sexism by talking unabashedly of bra shopping, menstruation etc. in Things They Wouldn’t Let Me Say, while on the other hand she was herself accused of sexual harassment by another comic. When the #MeToo movement laid bare the deep, dark secrets of the stand-up world, three comedy collectives in India, All India Bakchod (AIB), Schitzengiggles Comedy (SnG) and East India Comedy (EIC) either fell apart or saw the loss of some of the founding figures. How do we then look at their “subversive humour” or the reinvented relationship between the performer and the audience in this heavily mediatised world?

Although contemporary stand-up comics are seen as parrhesiastes or Horatian in their attempt to offer pleasurable instruction, the cathartic laughter of the audience also makes us wonder if catharsis is all it offers or is there something else that changes ever so slightly when we hear the ‘truth tellers’, 

For the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house… the true focus of revolutionary change is never merely the oppressive situations which we seek to escape, but that piece of the oppressor that is planted deep within each of us,and which knows only the oppressors’ tactics, the oppressors’ relationships. (Audre Lorde)

We believe that the joy, communion, sense of belonging and solidarity, empathy, humility, possibilities of (limited) transformation and laughing in the face of the powers that are and powers that be, that the form promises and delivers to the laughmakers and their audience is worth noting, investigating and celebrating. But how far and how deeply have the ‘master’s tools’ infiltrated stand-up comedy that punches up especially when most of them speak from a position of power and privilege is a question that we need to constantly ask and attempt to answer. 

Rashi Bhargava is assistant professor at North Eastern Hill University. Richa Chilana is assistant professor at University of Petroleum and Energy Studies. The two are also editors of Politics of Recognition and Representation in Indian Stand-Up Comedy.

Kannagi’s Curse: The Surprising Impact of the Sengol on Modi’s Realm

Whether people in the establishment like it or not, the Tamil sceptre’s ability to compel righteous acts can be seen in the government’s willingness to take U-turns.

When the Sengol was installed in the new Parliament House with great fanfare and dollops of piety in May 2023, the prevailing narrative was that Sengol had originally been presented to N**** (name censored by competent authority) at the time of Independence representing transfer of power from the British colonial masters to Indian successors, but, being a philistine, he had cast it aside and sent it to the Allahabad Museum where it remained labelled as his Golden Walking Stick.

Actually the Sengol was not a mere prop used at the time of transfer of power. It is disparaging to think of it as similar to the cane that changes hands when army officers take charge, and much less as a baton in a relay race. In ancient Tamil kingdoms, the Sengol (sceptre) was a symbol of justice — rigid, unbiased, fierce justice, that can punish an aberrant monarch as easily as it punishes a deviant commoner.

The Tamil epic Silappadhikaram describes how the Sengol got deformed and doubled up when Kannagi (a legendary Tamil woman who forms the central character of the Silappadhikaram) proved that her husband Kovalan had been unjustly killed on the orders of the Pandya king, and how the warped Sengol miraculously straightened itself, marking restoration of justice, when the king collapsed in a heap of remorse and shed his mortal coil, along with his unfortunate consort.

Also read: Behind Modi’s U-Turns, Nitish and Naidu’s Unreliable Track-Record as Allies

While many were sceptical about the design behind the installation of the Sengol in the new Parliament House, it does seem to have cast a completely unexpected spell, in keeping with its original  role as a voice of conscience. Consider the following:

  1. The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government, which could do whatever it pleased with absolute impunity considering its seeming invincibility, lost its majority in the subsequent election. The government has been forced to be more accommodative of allies and receptive to public sentiments. It has acquired eyes and ears that it seemed to lack earlier.

  2. The Lok Sabha speaker agreed to refer the Wakf (Amendment) Bill 2024 to a Joint Parliamentary Panel to be constituted in consultation with leaders of all parties. The very fact that a two-hour debate preceded  this decision is momentous, because many other Bills had been passed in the past with no debate in the absence of Opposition members who were either suspended or had walked out in frustration.

  3. The draft Broadcast Bill meant to ‘regulate’ (i.e. censor, according to critics) content creators for digital news, OTT and social media has been withdrawn. This was a draft privately circulated among a handful of industry stakeholders who were discouraged from sharing it after they realised that they were given watermarked versions of the Bill with a code unique to each of them to identify the culprit who leaked. (Why can’t they try this for the next NEET and UGC NET examinations?) The cognoscenti are of the view that this does not mean we have seen the back of the Bill.  However, if it is re-introduced, at least it will not, hopefully, be one that bears the thumb prints of a coterie.

  4. Following discontent expressed over the budget proposal to remove indexation benefits on long-term capital gains (LTCG), the government partly rolled back the proposal, without the need for thousands to lay siege to Delhi as was seen during the farmers’ agitation.

  5. The Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) published prominent  advertisements announcing recruitment of 45 persons through lateral entry  in the rank of joint secretary or director / deputy secretary for a wide variety of responsibilities ranging from organic farming to emerging technologies. After criticism that the principle of reservation has been given the go- by, the government firmly stepped in and nixed the recruitment drive.

  6. Talking about the UPSC, we had the spectacle of the chairman resigning years before the end of his term to devote himself, apparently, to the Anoopam Mission, a Swaminarayan sect offshoot. No wonder speculation surfaced  that this was on account of the UPSC allowing itself to be hoodwinked by Pooja Khedkar’s exploits of  furnishing a host of bogus certificates. This appears to be  just a coincidence. The UPSC’s loss may in fact be the Anoopam Mission’s gain. However, the sacking of the chief of National Testing Agency (NTA), as it passed through some testing times of its own in the NEET-NET row did come as a surprise because this represented a new phase of an unusual acknowledgement that things could go wrong – a startling veering off from the idea of ‘Never admit a fault or wrong,’  and ‘Never accept blame’ .

  7. Kangana Ranaut, a renowned historian, who announced to the world that India got its independence only in 2014 and  that it was Netaji and not the other N**** who was the first prime minister of India, instead of being eulogised for her remarks that the farmers’ agitation was marked by rapes and dead bodies, has been reprimanded by the party, much to the chagrin of her admirers and other hard core faithfuls.

  8. Reversing a 21-year-old reform of India’s civil services pension system brought in by the Atal Bihari Vajpayee government, a Unified Pension Scheme (UPS) has been announced, bearing strong resemblance to the Old Pension Scheme.

  9. The prime minister has apologised to Chhatrapati Shivaji and all those who were hurt by the collapse of Shivaji’s statue eight months after it was inaugurated in the presence of the prime minister himself. This is a deviation from the principle, ‘Never show remorse.’ Even Manipur did not trigger this. In pre-Sengol days, “anti-nationals” would have been blamed for the disaster and locked up. Applying the time honoured principle of, “If something goes wrong, hang somebody,” the structural consultant engaged for the erection of the statue has been arrested on a charge of attempted murder. Luckily for him, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) was not invoked. Still, the charge of attempted murder seems difficult to comprehend because police generally used to look for concepts like intent, knowledge, motive and the presence of a possible victim within killing range either in space or in time or both but then laws are now very  elastic. Remember how a hapless car driver was arrested in Delhi, for causing the tragic death of three even more hapless civil service aspirants  in the basement of Rau’s IAS Study circle —  for the reckless act of  driving past the building at a breakneck speed of about 10 kmph (which appears to be the speed when one sees the video — unless, of course, it had been recorded in slow motion)  plunging through a waterlogged road? Having had no role in the construction of the road or rains or the waterlogging or the weakness of the gate of Rau’s, he has been set free but not his car — an IIT team is reportedly evaluating whether its wheels could have generated enough force and momentum to produce a Niagara in the basement.

  10. For over a decade, the word ‘secular’ had come to be regarded as a profanity. But now the prime minister has come out in support of a secular civil code, thereby restoring a measure of dignity to the seven-letter combination.

  11. Let us now turn to foreign policy.  After having abstained on a US-sponsored United Nations Security Council resolution and a United Nations General Assembly resolution that censured Russia for its military actions in Ukraine, and after having hugged Vladimir Putin during a visit to Moscow, the prime minister has now thought it fit to visit Ukraine to give a comforting pat or two on Volodymyr Zelenskyys’s shoulder apart from the conventional hug — conveying the idea that the largest democracy in the world would like the sovereignty of all nations to be respected.

  12. The Sengol has wrought its magic on the Supreme Court too. After having shelved the matter for years, the Supreme Court finally declared the electoral bonds scheme unconstitutional.

There may be some in the establishment who think that considering all these developments, the Sengol has proved inauspicious and that its rightful place will be the Allahabad Museum. But would Yogiji welcome it back to his realm, considering its deadly potency? After all, the largest losses suffered by his party in the Lok Sabha elections were in his state, thanks to the Sengol aura.

On the other hand, others may think it would be a good idea for replicas of the Sengol to be kept in all legislatures and secretariats and courts. May be even Kamala Harris, considering her Tamil genes, could get one installed in the White House, assuming she gets past Donald Trump. She is from Chola land where the ideal of the Sengol is supposed to have originated.

K. Ramanujam is a former Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu. 

 

 

Having Made India ‘Viksit’, the Pradhan Sevak’s Third Term Must Be All about Diplomacy

From the Vishwaguru Archives: The Indian media loves the idea that their Leader is solving this conflict or that. While this guarantees headlines, the Most Competent Authority is amused that there are serious people in this country who actually believe he could have any kind of role in ending the Russia-Ukraine war.

This is a work of fiction. Although it may appear closer to reality than fiction.

§

The following note, drafted by JS (PSK), is being issued with the consent and approval of the Competent Authority, as a strategic directive to seniormost officials.

Copies (numbered) will be made available on a very limited basis. Except for the National Security Adviser, no other member of the Cabinet Committee on Security will get a copy. Not even the home minister. I am required to make it clear to all recipients that this is an internal document, strictly for limited circulation. It is not to be shared with any of our preferred media outlets; not even with the IT Cell.

A few days ago, I was given an opportunity by the Sarva Saksham Pradhikari (most competent authority, or MCA) to prepare a ‘working note’ based on what he was thinking aloud – and alone, his remarkable and fascinating mind uncluttered with the stereotypes our friends and foes like to foist on him.  

This is only a draft copy of the “working style note,” still to be finally approved by the MCA.

A Working Note on Thrust and Direction of Modi 3.0

After the 2024 Lok Sabha verdict, it has become imperative to re-jig our game in order to negate the voter’s negative message. We cannot allow our allies or opponents to set the agenda of our government.

At the same time, it is also clear that after ten years there are no domestic mountains to be conquered. We are a tired people, our moral capital is vastly depleted, and our imagination all blurred.

On the domestic front, we shall at best be able to muddle through, without any realistic hope of any spectacular achievement.

After the rebuff by ungrateful voters, the MCA is not prepared to spend time or energy on domestic agenda or issues. Let the Opposition-wallahs keep taunting us that he has not visited Manipur. The mess there is intractable, and that Biren Singh has made it worse, and the MCA is no longer able to discipline him. These BJP leaders are like sharks, first to smell blood in the water. 

The MCA believes that foreign policy is the only area of activity that will keep him on the front pages of newspapers. He has sadly noted that Man Ki Baat now gets relegated to the inside pages. The novelty is gone. 

He has therefore decided that the preponderance of our energies – political, strategic, economic, diplomatic and the NRIs – be directed towards external relationships, even if this means engaging in meaningless/insubstantive state visits, to and fro. 

The principal purpose and focus of all these external activities will be to keep alive the perception that the MCA is still a respected and very consequential global player. 

As the most competent authority put it, “we have this vast parasitic bureaucracy that goes by the high-sounding name of Indian Foreign Service. These self-styled “ambassadors” love nothing more than meaningless diplomatic activity—summits of various shapes and sizes. In fact, I am inclined to believe, after ten years, that if there is one global conspiracy, it is among the foreign offices across the globe, in good times as well as in bad times. Our diplomats are vastly underworked and grossly over-paid. I believe they will be happy to be corralled into inventing and manufacturing ‘diplomatic achievements’ for me. Look, how eagerly they got down to spreading yoga mats in capitals and cities around the world.” 

The MCA appreciates that we have an excellent foreign minister in S. Jaishankar. Most of the time, he is too clever by half – which suits the Indian “strategic community.”  Talk, talk and more talk keeps these strategic experts away from the doctor. Even those retired “experts” who are not with the government are per se obliged to talk about – and praise – the “Indian” stand on this or that remote global event.

Luckily, the global calendar seems full. Each event provides an opportunity for the MCA to generate headlines here in India –whether to go and address the General Assembly, or attend or not attend SCO meeting in Pakistan, or to smile or not to smile or hug or not to hug Xi –our media will focus and endlessly discuss this gesture or that snub to that world leader.

In the privacy of his home the Most Competent Authority is mightily amused that there are serious people in this country who actually believe he could have any kind of role in sorting out the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The more educated they are, the more desperate they are for him to acquire even a semblance of the aura and influence Nehru had acquired in the 1950s. While we actually have no role to play in resolving any of the world’s wars and conflicts, this does not mean that we will forgo any opportunity to let it be known that we are playing “peace-maker.” The Indian media simply loves the idea that their Leader has rolled up his sleeves and is solving this conflict or that.

The MCA believes that his “successes” and “achievements” in global diplomacy will not only keep the increasingly restive BJP MPs  in check but will also make the Nagpur establishment refrain from contemplating any “corrective” action. 

In any case, the MCA has regrettably concluded that Indian voters can never be fully satisfied; they will keep demanding more and more. He believes we have done the best that could be done at home. There are those newly empowered people on the opposition benches, insisting on explanations. This so unfair, and so unjust. After 10 years in power,  he feels he is now entitled to all the pomp and splendour of state visits and guards of honour. The “excellency” salutation is just music to his ears. 

Once this draft is approved, an appropriate operational note will be shared. 

Signed
Joint Secretary,
Pradhan Sevak Karyalaya

Atmanirbhar is the pen-name of an aspiring satirist, who irregularly contributes a column, From the Vishwaguru Archives, and believes that ridicule and humour are central to freedom to speech and expression.

 

‘Chalak’ Om and the Case of the Crawling Man

As chronicled by Dr Vatsan – as one more adventure of the world’s foremost forensic expert.

Preliminary note from Om Prakash’s collaborator, Dr Vatsan:

Those that have followed the exploits of the world’s foremost consulting detective will recall that it is on the website of The Wire that the chronicles of my illustrious friend and colleague, Om Prakash, first appeared. Known to an admiring public as ‘Chalak’ Om on account of his astuteness and acumen in disentangling mysteries, he has had an extended and distinguished career. What follows is one more in the long list of his cases that I have been privileged to record.

§

As I believe I have had occasion to remark on an earlier occasion, Mr ‘Chalak’ Om of Bekar Street yielded to no-one in his esteem for his illustrious predecessor in the art and science of forensic deduction, Mr Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street. So closely did ‘Chalak’ Om model his methods and his career upon the methods and career of Sherlock Holmes that it must surely be beyond the bounds of coincidence that some of the cases unravelled by the former should so closely parallel ones that had been earlier investigated by the latter.

For, and simply as it happens, if there is a battered old tin dispatch-box in the vaults of Cox & Co. carrying Dr Watson’s account of Sherlock Holmes and The Creeping Man, so is there a battered old tin dispatch-box in the vaults of Kak’s & Co. carrying Dr Vatsan’s account of ‘Chalak’ Om and The Crawling Man. If Dr Watson’s account details the curious affair of Professor Presbury, then Dr Vatsan’s account details that of the not-too-distantly homonymous Professor Preyas Bahari. It is the notes pertaining to this latter case that I draw upon in seeking to present, in what follows, the singular events concerning the Professor, his wife, and his cat – bearing in mind, at all times, my friend’s injunction to preserve the utmost tact and discretion that would be called for in the telling of such a tale.

Upon one of those unpleasantly humid mornings of late August of the year 2024, ‘Chalak’ Om and I had just finished our breakfast (he before he had started it, and I after 16 of our landlady’s delicious dosas), when there was a peal upon the door of our barsati at B221, and Mrs Hardhan ushered in a very nervous and daunted-looking woman. She was, in my estimation, in her mid-forties, and despite the soothing and matronly ways which were Mrs Hardhan’s wont in her dealings with disturbed clients, it was clear that our visitor was in a distraught state of mind. Barely had she been invited by Om to seat herself than she burst out in a high-pitched voice: “Oh Mr Om, tell me, what must I do to prevent my husband from throwing his coffee cup at me again?”

“Do not distress yourself, madam,” said Om in his customary reassuring manner.

“Pray gather yourself together, and tell us, without omitting any detail small or large, what has led up to your decision to hurry out of your home to seek our urgent assistance. Tut, it is no great mental feat to deduce haste: the smudged mascara and lipstick tell their own story.”

And with that, Om lit one of his interminable Langar Chhap bidis, leant back on his seat, closed his eyes, and steepled his fingers as the smoke from his bidi swirled about his head.

“I apologise for my earlier outburst, Mr Om,” said our visitor in a calmer voice.

“I shall attempt to present my case as coherently as possible. You should know then that I am the unhappy wife of Preyas Bahari, Professor of Economics at the University—“.

“Pray forgive the interruption, Mrs Bahari. I find it helps me enormously to have some details about the individuals involved in a case. My eternal help in these matters is the good old Index! If you please, Vatsan – ah, thank you! What have we here? Babita the housewife who administered arsenic in her husband’s paratha; Babubhai the broker who crashed the Stock Exchange; and here – Bahari (Preyas), Professor of Economics, author of many articles on the Indian economy;…publications in Journal of Data Manipulation, Quarterly Review of Dodgy Statistics, Studies in Economics Spin; …, pieces in the popular press; …widely celebrated in official circles for demonstrating that poverty in India has been eliminated and for establishing, with what Martin Gardner would call economeritricious rigour, that India’s unemployment rate is actually negative! An ambitious man, would you say, madam?”

“Indeed yes, Mr Om,” said our client, flushing with pride.

“Aiming for the Nobel Prize – that sort of thing?”

“Oh no, Mr Om, not that sort of thing at all. Rather, he would like to move out of the stuffy trappings of academics and into a position of power in Government, whence he hopes, by dint of working hard to please his masters, to move up the bureaucratic ladder so that he can seek and find his place in a plum assignment with the International Minatory Fund or the World Bunkum where, I am given to understand – even if I cannot quite put a figure on it – that the pensions are, you know – ”

“Quite,” said ‘Chalak’ Om drily. “Pray continue.”

“You should know that my husband and I had slipped into the somewhat formulaic routine, at the daily breakfast table, of my asking him if the morning paper had anything of interest to offer, and his responding with a non-committal grunt. A few days ago, however, he reacted to my question by rubbing his palms together and displaying what I thought was a distinctly anticipatory gleam in his eye. He did not, of course, bother to elaborate, being a man of few words. But just a couple of days later, and in response to my routine question, he snarled and hurled his coffee-cup at me, which I succeeded in dodging in the nick of time so that it missed me but found instead his favourite framed portrait of the Economics Minister, now damaged by coffee stains and causing him to get into an even worse frame of mind. Is my husband going mad, Mr Om? What explains his throwing the coffee cup at me? Must I endure this every morning for the rest of my life?”

“Pray be precise as to detail: the dates, madam, the dates! On which day did the happy response occur, and on which day the angry one?”

“I have heard of your passion for detail, Mr Om,” said our client, “so that though I was in a hurry when I left my home, I remembered to pick up the newspapers of August 22 and August 24 when the two events occurred. Here are the papers.”

“Splendid, Mrs Bahari, splendid – I could not have asked for a more perfect client!” Om went through the proffered newspapers rapidly, and when he looked up again, no one but I, the one man who knew every variation of his mood and temper, could have sensed in him that excitement which comes from discovery, however suppressed its external manifestation.

Also read: The Return of ‘Chalak’ Om: The Adventure of the Media Vampire

“Today is the 25th, and the cup-throwing incident has occurred just once: yesterday. It seems to me that you are unduly worried about the possibility of its indefinite recurrence. But to get down to the reason for why it happened: I would like you to try and recall everything of even a slightly odd nature that might have occurred between the 22nd and the 24th of August.”

“I do not know if this is of any great significance, but I believe I should mention what occurred on the night of August 23rd or early morning of August 24th. Before I come to that, you should know that my husband is a generally sound sleeper, and often fails to awaken even when Chipku settles on his stomach in the middle of the night – oh, I should have explained, Mr Om: Chipku is our cat, who sleeps with us. A clingy, huggy, darling cat, who loves her food and can hardly be separated from it –”

“No doubt all of this is of the greatest general interest, madam, not to say of particular gratification for lovers of feline pets,” said Om with some asperity, “but may I request you to proceed with a focus on the principal and relevant aspects of your account?” 

“I thought you wanted me to omit no detail however slight,” replied our visitor, with a touch of petulance. “But to resume: my husband, as I said, is a generally sound sleeper who scarcely gets out of bed during the course of the night, so you will conceive of my astonishment when, in response to a scuffling sound, I got up from my sleep, only to find that my husband was not in bed. When I switched on the flash of my mobile phone, I discovered him crouched by the foot of the desk at which he often works. When I asked to know what he was doing there, he replied peevishly that it was all my fault for keeping Chipku’s Miaow biscuits on the desk: he said that the packet containing the biscuits had listed over, scattering a lot of them on the floor, and that he had been gathering them up and returning them to the packet from which they had spilled out. I asked him to get back into bed, which he did, sullenly. I should have thought no more of this if it were not for his wholly uncharacteristic broken sleep and even more uncharacteristic concern for spilt biscuits in the middle of the night, taken together with the incident of the coffee cup on the following morning.”

“And where,” enquired Om, “was – er – Chipku when all of this was happening?”

“Why, in bed, between me and my husband, where she always sleeps.”

“That is most suggestive.”

“Are you drawing attention to some peculiar feature of the case, Om?” asked I.

“To the curious incident of the cat in the night-time.”

“But the cat did nothing in the night-time.”

“That,” remarked Om, “is the curious incident. I have been given to understand that the beast is a glutt – that is to say, something of an epicure. How is it that she failed to attack the biscuits the moment they spilt over on to the floor? There is no mystery: no biscuits ever spilt over. That was sheer bluff on the part of your husband, Mrs Bahari. Tell me, did you have occasion to examine the pajamas he slept in that night?”

“Yes, I did, before the pajamas went into the washing machine.”

“And were the pajamas scuffed and somewhat dirty at the knees?”

“Yes, Mr Om!”

“Ah! The ‘case’, such as it is, is solved.”

“Please tell me, Mr Om, that my cup-hurling husband is not a psychopath!”

‘That he certainly is not. But then again, he is something only a little less unsettling than a psychopath, to wit: a sycophant. Let me explain. If you had bothered to examine the newspapers of the 22nd and 24th of August before rushing over to consult me, you would not have failed to observe these two notices that your husband has circled in red. The first, appearing on the 22nd, announces a scheme for lateral entry into government involving the hiring of some 45 candidates under the auspices of the Union Public Service Commission. Hence the rubbing of the palms and the gleam in the eye at breakfast on the morning of the 22nd; with his record of spinning nice stories about the state of the economy, he thought a Joint Secretaryship – and everything else that that would entail – was a cinch. But after the Opposition’s objection to the scheme, and its swift withdrawal via a notice published in the newspapers on the 24th (here it is, circled by your husband), things changed drastically for him: hence the snarl and the hurled cup of coffee. On the night of the 23rd, what you found your husband doing – and this is testified to by the state of his pajamas at the knees – was crawling. He was practising what he intended to do for his bureaucratic and political masters, once he was appointed as Joint Secretary, up until the time he secured that prized job at the IMF or the World Bank. Madam, be assured that even if your husband should be in something of a bad mood for the next few days, he will overcome his disappointment in due course. After all, you cannot expect to keep a good sycophant down for ever. Sooner or later there should be other opportunities for inappropriate backdoor entries.”

With that, I saw a somewhat relieved, if also considerably chastened, Mrs Bahari to the door. As I turned around, ‘Chalak’ Om said: “Now that the case has been brought to a satisfactory conclusion, what say you, my dear Vatsan, to the prospect of lunch at the dhaba round the corner? They serve a mean baingan ka bharta there, and the price should suit us. That is surely no trivial consideration. For, despite whatever various Crawling Men may have to say about poverty and hunger and inflation and unemployment in the country today, for many of hoi polloi (which includes you and me), the wolf is never very far from the door!”    

Athur Kannan Thayil is a Chennai-based economist who sometimes writes under the name of S. Subramanian.

Cow-tow to Dhaka

Gau and their rakshaks are two products we could export to Bangladesh to the mutual benefit of both countries.

Note: Jug Suraiya writes a regular column for the Times of India but this column of his was blocked by the newspaper’s censors and is being published by The Wire so that the wider public can see for themselves how Big Media in India censors itself.


With the change of regime in Bangladesh, New Delhi must think of ways of maintaining the cordial relationship that India enjoyed with its neighbour when Sheikh Hasina held office. 

As a result of Bunny and I having visited Bangladesh in the 1980s, one thing — or rather two things — come to mind that might help in this regard. 

Driving to the city from the airport we were struck by something odd. It took us a while to realise what the oddness was, or what the oddness wasn’t. There were no cows. 

In Calcutta, where we then lived, there were cows aplenty in evidence, as in all Indian cities and towns. Wherever you looked, cows. On pavements, on roads, playing dodgem with passing cars, buses, lorries, and rickshaws. 

But here there was nary a cow to be seen. Had the Bangladeshi authorities tucked them out of sight in anticipation of our arrival, the way Indian officialdom screens from view garbage heaps and construction rubble when VVIPs come calling? But Bunny and I weren’t VVIPs, or even Ips, so where were the missing cows? 

We’d come to Dhaka at the behest of a college friend, a Dhaka tycoon, one of whose enterprises is involved in the import of milk powder from Switzerland. Bunny, who was copy chief of a multi-national ad agency in Calcutta, was filming a commercial for him, advertising the imported milk powder. 

The next day we set off to have a look at the countryside. No cows. At a roadside stall in the boonies we stopped for tea, which the owner proudly made with imported milk powder. The cows in Bangladesh seemed to have disappeared, which was why my friend’s venture was so successful. 

So unless the situation has dramatically changed, and Bangladesh has magically managed to make its disappeared cows reappear, we could send off to our neighbour some of our cows, which we have in abundance, wandering about the streets, ruminatively chewing plastic bags. 

And to make sure that they too don’t disappear, we could also send along our own cowbhais, of whom we also have a superabundance, and let them do their rakshakking there.

Jug Suraiya is a well-known columnist and writer.

 

The Return of ‘Chalak’ Om: The Adventure of the Media Vampire

In which an unsolved case against persons unknown—for conspiring with external agencies to wage war against the nation, threaten internal stability, support a neighbouring enemy and show disrespect to Indian traditions by visiting violence on the nose of a national icon—is promptly solved.

Preliminary Note from his collaborator, Dr Vatsan:

Those that have followed the exploits of the world’s foremost consulting detective will recall that it is on the website of The Wire that the chronicles of my illustrious friend and colleague, Om Prakash, first appeared. Known to an admiring public as ‘Chalak’ Om on account of his astuteness and acumen in disentangling mysteries, he had a long and distinguished career, which he however brought to a premature end, on these grounds: “What we have these days are not mysteries, but scandals—which we have now grown too blasé to be even shocked by. I would rather retire from my chosen vocation, return to my village, and devote the rest of my life to the cultivation of mooli.” This, in fact, is what he did. But at the end of the 2024 General Elections, sensing a glimmer of hope on the horizon, he decided to emerge from his retirement. The Return of ‘Chalak’ Om is heralded by two hitherto unpublished accounts from the canon. The first appeared yesterday, the second follows below.

§

Mr ‘Chalak’ Om of Bekar Street yielded, in his estimation of the human race, to one person and one person only: his distinguished predecessor, Mr Sherlock Holmes of Baker Street. Whenever the conversation veered toward the bizarre events that I am about to relate, Om was wont to say: “You have done me the great kindness, my dear Vatsan, of bringing to the attention of the reading public such little skills of deductive reasoning as I may possess. This deserves my gratitude, which I offer without reservation—that is to say, subject only to the judgement that you tend to ply your craft less in a spirit of scientific exposition than of, shall we say, lurid and titillating description. Well, well, one must not complain; and I trust you will not see me as doing so. I bring this up only to suggest that should you ever consider writing up an account of this affair, I hope I may rely on you to employ for it the title ‘The Adventure of the Media Vampire’. No doubt such a title militates against my own unenthusiastic views on sensationalism, but on this occasion, ‘vampire’ is as apt a description as any one can hope to find for the blood-sucking villain of this piece. More importantly, perhaps, it is my way of paying homage, in a queer, inverted way, to certain sentiments of the great man, as recorded by his faithful Boswell in the account known to all the world as ‘The Adventure of the Sussex Vampire’. My reference is to this assertion of Holmes’s: ‘This Agency stands flat-footed upon the ground and there it must remain. The world is big enough for us. No ghost need apply.’ Such indeed is also the substance of my own inherited belief—one which, however, appears to have been driven to suspension in this case. For, in ‘unravelling’ it, I have, in defence of superstition, had to resort to the sophistry that one must always allow for the one exception which proves the rule. That, at any rate, must remain the ‘official’ version of my position on the subject—unless you should defer a public account to a time when it is safe for publicity. ”

The case in question is indeed the only one, from among the innumerable mysteries that inhabit ‘Chalak’ Om’s crowded archives, in which he found himself constrained to invoke the supernatural for a solution. As to how convincing—but no, let me not anticipate. In the belief that the passage of years has now made it safe for me to do so, I shall reveal my hand, and share a confidence, at the end of this account, after the conclusion of what Om has referred to as ‘the official version’ of the story. Naturally, I can offer no evidence for the truth of my revelation—my readers must take it or leave it, according to their disposition.

It was on a certain warm afternoon of April of the year  ——   that the city of Mumbai—the financial, industrial, entertainment and fashion capital of the country—became alive to the fact that the television channel Nation’s owner and prime-time host, known far and wide because of his natural propensity for spontaneous combustion, had been found ranting in his seat. This in itself was no cause for alarm, nor even mild surprise, for it was an extensively recognized fact that this man spent all his waking hours ranting and, indeed, ranted also in his sleep, because that was his profession and the means by which he made his (very substantial) living. What was a source of overwhelming concern for the man’s sanity is that, for the very first time in his career, he actually seemed to have a reason for ranting. For he was discovered, in his office, raving in rage and screaming in pain from what remained of a pulverized and bloodied nose in the centre of his normally smug and self-satisfied face.

It is scarcely necessary to recall for readers the nature of the man’s avocation. Even so, for the benefit of those that might still be ignorant, here is a brief description. From his studio, each day, he broadcast a new lie aimed at sending good and innocent people to jail, or dividing the citizenry along communal lines, or exculpating criminals from wrong-doing, or slandering politicians who did not share his ideology, or one or another of such constructive and deeply nationalistic things under the benign gaze of his political masters. That he should be enabled to perform his splendid services for the country without interference from urban naxals and similar undesirables naturally required that he be afforded 24-hour protective security, at home and at work, with the tax-payer’s money.

Ringed as his office was by three layers of police cordons, permitting neither ingress into nor egress from his room without official scrutiny, it was a source of complete bafflement to the entire official security establishment how this media celebrity had succeeded in acquiring a broken nose. All that could be gathered was that he was suddenly heard screaming in anger and pain on account of a nose bleeding from and flattened by an apparently prodigious force, in which state the dozen policemen who rushed in upon registering his discordant yells discovered him. The only other feature of interest recorded by the investigation team was a splash of the victim’s blood, as if it had spattered there, upon the wall some eight feet distant from where the victim sat. Here, if ever, was a genuine Locked Room Mystery.

An FIR was naturally filed against some person or persons unknown for conspiring with external agencies to wage war against the nation, threaten internal stability and security, support a neighbouring enemy nation, and show disrespect to the culture and traditions of the country by visiting violence upon the nose of a national icon. That did not, of course, solve the mystery, so it was only a matter of time before our humble abode at b221 Bekar Street was invaded by the rotund person of the Minister of Internal Affairs, seeking Om’s assistance in shedding light upon the shocking assault that had been perpetrated against the nation’s leading patriot.

From the beginning, Om had displayed no interest in the case, ascribing it to a security failure on the part of a flat-footed police force. He ventured the same opinion again when pressed by the Minister for an explanation. “Mr Minister,” he said, “Over 63 per cent of the electorate did not vote for your party in the recently concluded Election. I would hazard the view that any one of approximately 614 million anti-nationals in the country would have claimed the soundest of motives for pushing this television personality’s nose in for him. A competent security system should have prevented the event. Having allowed it, it is scarcely feasible to expect that all but one of 614 million individuals can now be eliminated from suspicion.”

The Minister of Internal Affairs bridled at the suggestion that his police staff was an incompetent lot, and he made his displeasure plainly known to ‘Chalak’ Om.

“Very well, then,” said Om. “If you can underwrite the complete ability and loyalty of the police, we are left with only one possible solution to the mystery. As you may be aware, I myself have no use for the super-natural, since the world of natural phenomena presents, in my view, enough material for learning and understanding without our having to transcend it for an explanation of those events whose provenance is only and entirely earthly. At the same time, however, I cannot deny one of my own favourite dicta, namely that when one has eliminated everything that is possible, then whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

“Thus am I led to a paranormal explanation of your patriot’s unfortunate nose. Let us consider the simple and bare facts of the case, four in number, as we know them.

“One, no-one could have entered or exited that room without the knowledge of the surrounding security agents who you assure me are unceasingly alert and eagle-eyed.

“Two, from the writing-pad on which your friend was scribbling at the time his nose was—ah—vandalised, we find that he had made a list of untruths which he was planning to broadcast in his evening show. The list included the following items: (a) an account of who had attacked whom at a university campus; (b) a ‘report’ on who had and had not made communally incendiary statements at a public meeting; (c) a template for how to pass off suicides as murders and murders as suicides; (d) a slanderous depiction of honourable human rights activists as terrorists; (e) a wholesale suppression of the incidence of maternal anaemia, poverty, and youth unemployment; and (e) a wholesale exaggeration of the magnitude of the economy’s growth rate.

“Three, the man’s nose afforded every evidence of having made contact with a portentous force, suggesting the imagery, to one of the investigators on the spot, that ‘it (the victim’s nose) had run into a concrete wall.’

“And four, there was a splash of blood that matched the blood from the nose on the wall, some eight feet away, which the victim was facing.

“I submit that the only explanation that covers these facts is one that is not quite contained within the four walls of earthly rationality such as we have been trained to recognize and accept. Once we accommodate a fifth dimension in our scheme of things, we find that the pieces fall smoothly into place. I put it to you that what follows is all that survives when once the realm of possibilities has been exhausted. From the first of the facts that I have reviewed above, there was no-one else in the room, apart from the victim himself, when his nose was bloodied. And from facts three and four, and the eminently reasonable assumption that the victim was too deeply in love with his own face to cause it even the slightest and most inadvertent damage with his own fist, I conclude that his nose did in fact run into the facing wall, with a force that pulverised it.”

“Are you suggesting,” asked the Minister with a sneer, “that the poor man rushed headlong into the wall for the sheer pleasure he knew it would bring him?”

“No, no, Mr Minister,” replied ‘Chalak’ Om. “You neglect to take any account of fact number two—that your illustrious client was preparing a list of untruths at the time his misfortune overtook him. Once you do, you will be enabled to see that it wasn’t he who rushed into the wall, it was just his nose.”

“How—where—what is the connection?” sputtered the Minister.

“Ah! You will find the answer in the story of the puppet who lied. Collodi’s Pinocchio, Mr Minister. We are told that his nose grew with every lie he uttered. And so with your friend. Nature herself eventually rebelled as he added lie upon lie to the list he was preparing that afternoon: the nose grew by an inch with the first lie, by a foot with the second lie, by three feet with the third lie, by five feet with the fourth lie; by six feet with the fifth lie; and with the sixth lie, it shot out all of eight feet from his face to run smack and with an awful velocity into the wall, with the consequences we have seen. After that there was no more nose to contend with. That, Mr Minister, is what happens to puppets who lie.”

The Minister’s face turned dark with fury, and then a sickly green with dread, even as he blustered uncertainly: “And you expect people to believe this?”

“This is very small beer, Mr Minister,” said Om in a low voice, “compared to what people are expected to believe when they are treated to the daily broadcasts put out by your friend—in the name of what it is essential for the citizenry to know.”

The Minister got up abruptly and saw himself out of the door.

There was a long silence after the man’s departure. I broke it, eventually, by asking: “Surely you don’t set store by your own explanation, Om? It is not like you, to advance magic and miracles as solutions to problems of logic and reason!”

Om’s body was racked by convulsions of internal mirth. “No, Vatsan,” he said, laughing heartily, “Of course not. All of that was just moonshine!”

“What, then? What is the truth?”

“The truth, Vatsan, is the truth of Father Brown’s Invisible Man. As he once observed, in a resolution of one of his mysteries, there are some men people never see even when they are right in front of their eyes. Such as men in uniform: postmen, soldiers, laboratory clinicians, waiters, policemen. Imagine this. A man, call him X, dresses up as a policeman, and mingles inconspicuously with the other policemen forming a ring around the television host’s office. It occurs to nobody to ask any question when X takes in a cup of tea to the man at eleven o’clock in the morning. The tea is, let us imagine, ‘spiked’. Five minutes later, he re-enters the fellow’s room with a snack, of which three-quarters has already been removed, to convey the impression that the occupant has eaten most of it. The impostor replaces the empty tea-cup with another cup carrying traces of regular tea. He pockets the original tea-cup, to remove all evidence of the sleeping draught in it, which by now has taken effect on the man in the seat in front of him. He has wanted to do this for long, and now he has created the opportunity for himself. With considerable satisfaction, he retracts his arm and lets loose,  dabs some of the resulting blood on the wall opposite, exits the room—again in full view of every other policeman present—and then retires once more, and permanently, into private life. Presently, our celebrity awakens, has no notion of what has occurred, and sets up that infernal din which brings the policemen rushing in. The rest you know.”

“But who, Om, who is X?” I cried.

“Does it matter very much, Vatsan, who out of 614 million persons with good reason to do it actually did do it? Ah, I see, you will insist! Very well. Let me just say that in the days of my prime, professional boxers I have transacted with have told me that running into my straight left was very much like running into a concrete wall.”

“Om! You are not saying, are you, that—?!”

‘Chalak’ Om of Bekar Street placed a finger upon his lips. “I am saying nothing, my dear Vatsan. Nothing.” 

The author is a lapsed academic who sometimes writes under the name of S. Subramanian.

 

 

 

The Return of ‘Chalak’ Om: The Singular Case of the Three Disappearances

As chronicled by Dr Vatsan. Being a further adventure of the world’s foremost forensic expert.

Preliminary Note from his collaborator, Dr Vatsan:

Those that have followed the exploits of the world’s foremost consulting detective will recall that it is on the website of The Wire that the chronicles of my illustrious friend and colleague, Om Prakash, first appeared. Known to an admiring public as ‘Chalak’ Om on account of his astuteness and acumen in disentangling mysteries, he had a long and distinguished career, which he however brought to a premature end, on these grounds: “What we have these days are not mysteries, but scandals—which we have now grown too blasé to be even shocked by. I would rather retire from my chosen vocation, return to my village, and devote the rest of my life to the cultivation of mooli.” This, in fact, is what he did. But at the end of the 2024 General Elections, sensing a glimmer of hope on the horizon, he decided to emerge from his retirement. The Return of ‘Chalak’ Om is heralded by two hitherto unpublished accounts from the canon. The first appears today, the second will follow tomorrow.

§

“Ah, Vatsan, this is positively an embarrassment of riches,” said my friend ‘Chalak’ Om, rubbing the palms of his hands together with undisguised pleasure and anticipation. “I have been lamenting the absence of any problem upon which to apply those skills of ratiocination for which I might have acquired some little reputation (notwithstanding your own substantial efforts in your accounts, my dear Vatsan, at sensationalising the trivial and dramatising the insignificant in favour of underlining those sturdy virtues of logic and method which alone matter in the successful conduct of the Science of Deduction), but I am happy now to announce that I can look forward to not one, not two, but three cases in quick succession! My first client should be here any moment now. No, no, I insist, Vatsan—I need you by my side, my dear fellow, to perform your customary invaluable role of a reflector, if not radiator, of light.”

Thus began upon a cold winter morn of November of the year `24, in the modest living room of our modest barsati at b221 Bekar Street, the extraordinary affair of three seemingly unconnected incidents of men who vanished suddenly, inexplicably and utterly, in a manner paralleled only by the baffling case, which I have recorded elsewhere, of Mr Jamshed Bilimoria who, stepping back into his own house to get his umbrella, was never more seen in this world. But I anticipate, and get ahead of my story.

In telling the story in sequence, I shall skip over the minutiae of the three cases, as they were presented, one following the other. In all three cases our clients were the wives of men who had disappeared without notice two days earlier, at, as it turned out, virtually the same time (between two and three of the afternoon) when the respective wives were away from home, shopping. One of the three men was a young career diplomat who had just begun his professional life in the government’s Tax Department as a member of the Central Revenue Service. The second person was a professor of Economics at a well-known research institution. The third was a junior lecturer in English at a local college. The only other salient feature of the cases is that, this being a ‘Chalak’ Om story, each of the wives on arrival fainted dead away upon our (third-hand) Pepperfry rug, and had to be revived with a specific I always have ready to hand, namely, a stiff shot of Old Monk rum.

While my friend ‘Chalak’ Om heard out the cases in phlegmatic silence, his naturally inscrutable face rendered almost invisible by the clouds of smoke that emanated from the interminable sequence of Langar Chhaap bidis he smoked, I was myself quite affected by the distress of the three ladies, and not least when the English lecturer’s wife (a very pretty young woman as I believe I am well qualified to judge as a keen connoisseur in such matters) said brokenly: “You must find him for me, Mr Om! He is so dear to me! Oh, and he had such simple, childish pleasures in life! Such as setting crossword puzzles for The Bindu Financeline newspaper—!”

Om got up from his chair as if abruptly expelled by a great force. “Really, Madam?” he enquired, in a voice suddenly sharp and raised. He stooped and held the shoulders of the young woman in his hands, as, his eyes boring into hers, he said: “That could be an invaluable clue to a resolution of this mystery! Why was I not made aware of this at the outset? No, no, do not be alarmed! It is better late than never, I suppose! I do not wish to disappoint you with what may turn out to be false hope, but I do believe that what you have said presents us with features of the most distinctly compelling interest. It may yet hold the key to this pretty puzzle.” With that, he virtually bundled our bewildered young client out of our front door (but not before she had turned her head in my direction to throw me a pretty little glance of appeal which I trust I was equal to the chivalrous task of responding to with a look, of my own, of comfort and reassurance).

“Quick, Vatsan, the back page of The Bindu Financeline of November 18th, if you please! Pray be so kind as to read out the clues of the crossword puzzle, one by one.”

“Very well, Om. Here we are. 1 Across: ‘What we need badly, but do not have (6,3)’—”

“Stop! That will do! You need go no further, Vatsan! What is it that is immediately suggested, in a finance and economics newspaper, by an allusion to something that ‘we need badly, but do not have’, a phrase in two words of six and three letters respectively—especially after it was formally abolished in the Union Budget of 2016-17? It should be apparent to the meanest intellect that the solution is—”

“‘Wealth Tax’,” I yelled, in the excitement of discovery.

“Quite, Vatsan,” said Om. “You have most obligingly verified my conjecture. If I am not vastly mistaken, ‘wealth tax’ must be a common thread running through all three cases of disappearance. Let us see if we can establish the connection. The headlines, please, of the January 18th issue of Financeline. Here we are! ‘Economics Minister Throws Tantrum’. Surely, that is not news? The Economics Minister throws at least one tantrum each day, and sometimes eight. But what was it about on this occasion? Here we are! A young Revenue Service officer in the Tax Department—there’s our man!—has ‘leaked’ an internal report he has been working on, which recommends a wealth tax and an inheritance tax on the ultra-rich to finance a part of the Government’s occasional expenditure on alleviating poverty. There’s the link with Client Number One. And Client Number Two, the Economics Professor? Quick, Vatsan! Shall we press the good old Index to the rescue? Thank you! What have we here? If it is an Economics professor, one can safely infer it must be a Bengali, and possessed, further, of a double-barrelled name—though the second inference, as it turns out, is true only to a first order of approximation. For what does the Index reveal?—ho! hum! Ballu the strangler of infamous memory, Banwarilal the poisoner,—aha! here it is: Professor Amartya Basu-Dutta-Chaudhuri-Khasnobis! Quick! Quick! His list of publications! And there is the final piece of the puzzle! His last publication, which has appeared in the latest issue of The Annals of Economic Squiggles, is titled: ‘Why India Must Implement a Wealth Tax: Evidence from a Tobit Model with Auto-Correlated Errors in One-Period Lagged  Categorical Variables Corrected for Endogeneity by Sequential Instrumentation’. The case is complete! I know now exactly where the three missing men are!”

“My dear Om! Where? And how—?”

“Tut, man. It is simplicity itself. The men can be found at Janakpuri, Delhi 110058. One moment, while I verify something from one of my numerous contacts in the legal world.” Om busied himself on the phone, and eventually replaced the receiver with a look of satisfaction on his face. “Just as I imagined, Vatsan. That Janakpuri location I mentioned is the address of the Tihar Jail Complex. Our three friends have been incarcerated on charges of misguiding the public, spreading enmity against the ultra-rich, creating public disharmony, double-guessing the Economics Ministry, sedition, participating in an international conspiracy to reveal the government in a bad light, disturbing the peace, sabotaging the economy, preventing growth, spreading canards about inequality, getting above themselves, growing too big for their boots, thinking no end of themselves,—the list goes on and on, but no doubt you get the general idea.”

“All this for recommending a tax on wealth and inheritance?”

“Precisely. I suppose we must content ourselves with Henry David Thoreau’s thought, that ‘under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.’ Well, well. It remains for us now to bring the matter to the attention of the unfortunate fellows’ wives, who no doubt will seek legal assistance to try and get their husbands off on bail. Let us hope for the best. By the way, and since you are not rich, leave alone ultra-rich, I trust, my dear fellow, that you have remembered to file your income-tax returns?”

The author is a lapsed academic who sometimes writes under the name of S. Subramanian.

 

India Has Now Blocked the Full ‘Honest Government Act’ Satire Video on YouTube

YouTube’s email notifying the channel owners on the government’s move to block the full version came 11 days after the YouTube Short was blocked.

Two days after a report by The Wire pointing out that the Narendra Modi government had blocked the ‘short’ version of a satirical video on the state of democracy in India while the full version existed on YouTube for all to watch, the Indian government succeeded in getting the full version blocked.

The video in question was published by the Australia-based Juice Media channel on YouTube on June 1. It is an unforgiving satirical take on government overreach in a democracy, narrated in an anodyne public-service-announcement style, as part of the channel’s ‘honest government ad’ series. It focused on several countries – many having gone or going to the polls this year – but most screen time was devoted to India, and how the Modi government has imprisoned opposition leaders, bulldozed minorities’ homes and killed the freedom of expression.

The video has 642,715 views now, but short unauthorised clips of it were shared multiple times on social media sites. Juice Media also uploaded the part relevant just to India as a Short — a video format on YouTube which allows shorter uploads.

On June 11, the channel’s owner Giordano Nanni got a notice from YouTube saying that the Union home ministry had requested that the Short be blocked in India because it invokes Indian Penal Code sections on provocation to cause riots, break public peace, and cause public mischief. The government also cited the Prevention of Insults to the National Honour Act, which deals with “insults to [the] Indian National Flag and Constitution of India.”

Nanni told The Wire that he was not surprised because his Indian viewers had foretold such an outcome. He has shared the following prophetic comment on the original video.

A viewer wrote ‘waiting for India to get YT to block this’ as a comment on the Juice Media video which India got YouTube to block.

Nanni had earlier wondered why the government would have been compelled to block just the Short and not the whole video – which had likely skipped notice. “Perhaps they thought the Short was more likely to go viral,” he had conjectured.

Two days later, on June 22, YouTube once again wrote to Nanni, this time saying that it received “a legal complaint from a government entity” on the video.

YouTube added that  it blocked the video in India “after review”. Instead of the video, Indian viewers can see the message ‘Video unavailable: This content is not available on this country domain due to a legal complaint from the government.’

YouTube’s email to Juice Media, informing them of the blocking move in India.

YouTube’s email about blocking the full version has no mention of laws the government felt the video had run foul of. It has a line on YouTube’s mandate to remove “content where necessary to comply with local laws.” The Indian government has blocked videos and entire channels – often themed around news – under the Information Technology Rules before.

The Wire has written to YouTube for details on the government intimations it received and the steps its review process concerned. This article will be updated if a spokesperson responds.

For Nanni and his tiny team of four, getting censored is not new – the Indonesian and Tasmanian governments have previously acted against videos on the channel that are critical of their behaviour. Nanni does what he and his team often do in situations where they are made to tackle bigger forces – resort to humour.

“We were left wondering why the Chosen One had only blocked the Short version of our video, now we know he probably just hadn’t noticed until The Wire published an article pointing out that a full version of the video existed,” Nanni says.

The ‘Chosen One’ is a play on Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s claim on the election trail that he had divine origins.

Nanni had said earlier that he and his team made this video because Indians had asked for one on their country. Comments on the Instagram post with which Nanni announced the latest blocking move range from “largest democracy for you, ladies and gentlemen” to “we warned you!”.

A comparison of the number of Indian viewers on the Juice Media’s YouTube channel in the last year (left) versus the last month (right).

Will the fact that the video is blocked to viewers of the most populated country on earth have an effect on his channel’s revenue? Nanni says he is not really concerned about that. But he did reveal something which may explain why the video came under the government’s radar. “Normally India is in the top dozen or so countries that watches our videos. But as you can see, in the past month it jumped up to number two,” he says.

Censorship, Careers and Other Dire Perils of Motherhood

On Mother’s Day, Nandana Dev Sen looks back at a Career Day talk that put her in the red.

“I am as old now as there are continents in the world!” my daughter declared gleefully. Earlier that day, Meghla had celebrated her birthday with her classmates, who were all seven or six years old. It was, of course, the perfect moment to start planning their careers. Especially if you lived in New York City.

So, I was immensely flattered when my daughter’s principal invited me to speak to her class on Career Day. Could I talk to the Red Cluster about an actor’s life, he requested by email, using a Question-and-Answer format please? As there would be other parents presenting as well, perhaps I could wrap up my interaction in 7-10 minutes.

“Of course!” I had beamed at my computer, flushed with pride.

I slept fitfully the night before Career Day, suffering from a dual attack of hay fever and anxiety, mulling over all the questions the kids would surely ask about the process and business of acting. Did I believe in The Method, or Meisner? How did I ever find an agent? What was my biggest artistic challenge? 

Wearing a bright red suit, my messy curls (not quite) restrained by copious bobby pins, I ran into Assembly a few minutes late, sweaty and panting. The other parent presenters smiled at me welcomingly. They were all casual yet stylish, fragrant, and supremely relaxed. They radiated confidence and good health, like each of them had got at least ten hours of sleep.

I was up first. “Good morning, children!” I started cheerily. I could feel my hay fever tickling my nose. “Go Re… Re… RED… Aaa… Atch… ATCHOOOO!” 

I embarked on a bout of serial sneezes that reverberated throughout the grand Assembly Hall. All hands, big and small, reached for their masks. Within seconds, I was facing a fully, elegantly, and colourfully masked audience.

“I’m so sorry,” I spluttered, salvaging a crumpled blue mask from my coat pocket. “It’s not COVID, just allergies.”

A boy with beautiful long hair raised his hand.

“Yes?” I asked brightly.

“How do you know it’s not COVID?” he inquired. “Did you test yourself this morning? The symptoms can be identical.”

“True,” I mumbled. “But I often get hay fever in spring mornings. It will go away soon, I… I… Aa… ATCHOO!”

“I have a question!” A girl in a blue faux-fur bolero piped up. “One of your socks has pink polka dots but the other has red hearts. Are they from the Mismatched Socks brand?”

“Yes!” I lied with a giant smile.

“Awesome!” She smiled back.

Clearly, it was time to take charge. “Now I have a question for you all!” I projected loudly. “Can you tell me if this statement is true or false? ‘Acting is all about being honest’!”

“False!” yelled Beautiful Hair. “Actors always pretend to be someone else and lie about their feelings!”

“Well,” I muttered, “It’s more like they must become someone else, and truly feel everything the character feels. For example, a good actor would cry for real, she wouldn’t pretend to cry. That would never be convincing.”

A freckled cutie with orange locks and a disarming smile raised her hand.

“It works for me every time, especially with Daddy! I fake-cry whenever I don’t want to do something, and he always says — ‘It’s okay, Poppet!’ Don’t you think I’d be the best actor ever?”

“Yes, I do,” I said, desperately looking through my notes.

I was saved — or so I thought — by a tidy boy in glasses. “My name is Rajendra Kumar Mody, with a Y, and I was first runner-up in the Scripps National Spelling Bee.”

“Wow,” I said. “That’s amazing!”

“Ms. Miller said you were a famous actress,” said Rajendra. I smiled modestly. “When I looked you up, I found all these topless pictures of you. My parents took away my iPad.”

“Wow,” I said. “That’s terrible.”

“Why weren’t you wearing a top?”

A screengrab from the film Rang Rasiya. Photo: By arrangement.

“Well, the film was about freedom of expression. I mean, it was about art. And I was playing, you see, the painter’s muse. My character —”

“What’s a muse?” Freckles interrupted, frowning.

“It’s the painter’s girlfriend,” shrugged Blue Bolero.

“It’s a naked model,” explained Beautiful Hair.

“It’s an artiste’s ultimate inspiration,” declared Rajendra Kumar Mody.

 “All of the above!” I gushed nervously.

“Mama won a big prize for that film,” Meghla intervened, protective as always.

“For being naked?” Freckles was delighted. “I could win that prize! I’m great at running around naked!”

“Actually, the film got many awards,” I tried to change the topic. “It was a very special film, based on history. About the first Indian court case on censorship.”

“What is Sin-Sir-Ship?” asked Blue Bolero.

“It’s when you cut out parts of a story, or ban certain kinds of information…” I was fumbling for words. 

“It’s a bad thing then?” Blue Bolero persisted.

“Well, yes… It can be, if you’re not allowed to share or see the whole truth about something —”

“Like when my parents confiscated my iPad,” Rajendra glowered. “Very bad.”

I peeked sideways to find a neat row of parents waiting to discuss their luminous careers, staring at me unblinkingly, not looking quite so welcoming anymore. I gathered up my unused notes. 

“Guess what?” I said, seizing the perfect opportunity to enforce a little censorship, in living colour. “You don’t have to learn about all that yet, Red Cluster. Happy careers to all of you — this was such fun!” 

Nandana Sen is a writer, actor and child-rights activist. She is the author of six children’s books, translated into more than 15 languages globally. 

 

 

 

A Giant Machine Called Prevention of Money Laundering Act

The Machine is all-powerful because it is legal, sanctioned by an order of the highest tribunal which ordained that due process, right to liberty and the Constitution have to bow to it.

It was the best of times,
it was the worst of times.
The country had become the mother of democracy,
yet democracy felt orphaned.
International observers were invited to witness free and fair elections,
but prominent opposition candidates were in jail.
One party’s coffers overflowed with bonded money,
but another’s purse strings were cut.
Achhe din had been ushered in,
but pichhle din felt a lot safer.
It was the time of the cross-roads,
it was the time when all roads were crossed
It was the time of two Indias.

(Written with a nod to Charles Dickens’ opening lines in The Tale of Two Cities)

In the nation’s capital, at the centre of public life, stood the GIANT MACHINE. It loomed over all buildings and institutions – parliament, courts, government offices – dwarfing them with its size and menacing appearance, causing fear, panic and terror in all. This creature of Frankenstein was called the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). It was a guillotine which slashed the lives and fortunes of the hapless fed to it. Cart-loaded tumbrils fetched the wretched accused from captivity to be placed under its swinging arc. And from its extended multiple arms flew out piercing knives across the breadth of the land – the dreaded Enforcement Directorate raids – they came without notice, without cause, the paralysed victims never to see the light of day for years.

The Machine was all-powerful because it was legal, sanctioned by an order of the highest tribunal which ordained that due process, right to liberty and the constitution had to bow to it. So said Khan Will Care, tenderly ministering to the needs of the state. The only recourse was a slim virtually non-existent key, Section 45. Inverting the time-honoured presumption of innocence, it said that the judge had to find the offender innocent before releasing them on bail. This minuscule key lay buried like the needle in the judicial haystack. Searching for it was onerous, far easier to focus on the hay.

One knight was bold enough to challenge the controllers. He was the custodian, the Wal of the capital city called Kejri.  The controllers and he were always at odds, he matching their might with hit-and-run raids. They feared his popularity with the masses. Elections were announced, and in line with their  Code of Conduct, the Machine struck and the Wal was sucked into it.

In desperation, the Wal’s comrades began a feverish search for justice. They went first to the top of the haystack using a fork named Article 32 meant for the most serious cases. Never before has a sitting chief minister been arrested, we are a federal country. How can a top opposition politician be jailed during a general election, we are a democracy. This case is one and a half years old, why now? Look at the favours granted to approvers after implicating him. His chief associates have already been sucked by the Machine, one Sisodia languishing in its caverns for 14 months. And this is a Machine meant to deal harshly with drug and narcotics offenders; Wal heads a popularly elected government. Don’t we have a constitution and its basic structure?

But the haymakers at the top were sending these cases to the bottom stack. Never mind that we all know how difficult is it to get the key there; the chief haymaker said so himself recently. Free and fair elections and constitution and the like are all very well, but we have the Khan’s legal knots, which resemble Madame Defarge’s knitting needles. Never mind that Justice Vivian Bose chastised his peers for out Shylocking Shylock by confining the writ to the bond, and Justice Khanna made personal liberty trump the suspension of fundamental rights during the Emergency; now the Khan is the Emperor.

So began the dejected and rejected trudge from the bottom to the middle and again to the top. Finally, after 50 days of captivity, and half the election over, the Wal is released. Because the timing of arrest is inappropriate, during an election. But Sirs, everyone knew that all along, right from the day of arrest. What took you so long? The court made reference during the hearing to Wal’s right to life; doesn’t democracy also have a right to life? And some conditions on him run counter to the great Judge Learned Hand’s dictum – Thou shalt not ration justice.

Meanwhile, the Machine’s jubilant friends have had the campaign field all to themselves. The chief made speeches threatening one-sixth of the country’s population. Complaints were made to the election commission, but that body was handpicked by him, elbowing out the head of the judiciary. For them to find spine, and then to exert it, was a far cry and might draw the Machine’s attention. They seemed afflicted by a curious eye infection, unable to look offenders in the eye. Meanwhile, the public readied to speak, no one sure how.

But down South, another story is told in God’s Own Good Country, somewhat different from Ayodhya where the Lord is coopted into politics. Here a minister named after prophets Thomas and Isaac goes to the middle heap in his state against the Machine. That haymaker responds in simple basic terms on April 9. By all means, let the onerous machining take place, but wait till after the elections, what’s your hurry now? Cause for a little cheer. It might benefit this country to look south for some lessons.