Pakistan, in person: Part II

After discussing about life in Pakistan, Islamic terrorism and Gandhi-Nehru-Jinnah and Benazir Bhutto(which I have posted in part 1 of the interview) we went talking about life of a common man under dictatorship, Osama Bin Laden, Women literacy and IPL. We wrapped up with Koffee with Karan style rapid fire covering topics like Lashkar-e-Toiba.

People in India and rest of the world have an image of Pakistan which is very different from the actual Pakistan. Hope this series of uncensored interviews help in clearing a lot of doubts about Pakistan and Pakistanis. For me it was a revelation of sorts. I am indebted to Muhammad Awais Awan and Ayesha Ilyas for sharing their views on issues which are in the top of our minds but are never discussed. I still remember that time. At about 1:30 am, after a really long and hectic day, you guys had no dearth of enthusiasm and agreed to give the interview. Thanks Ayesha and Awais! You guys rock!

Prashant: Pakistan had democracy until 1999. Then there was dictatorship and now again there is democracy.  As a common citizen of Pakistan what changes did you see in people’s life before dictatorship, during dictatorship and now?

Ayesha:  In the ten years since 1999, Pakistan has regressed to a state which is probably worse than what it was 50 years back. Before 1999 though the government wasn’t good, people were having peaceful life.  In 1999 we gave a warm welcome to Musharraf’s government which was our mistake.  We didn’t realize that democracy can never be worse than dictatorship.  Even if it was bad, the elections would have somehow changed things for better.  The 2001 episode happened. Musharraf gave everything in the hands of America, took a U-Turn on the Taliban issue. The whole region got disturbed only because of  Musharraf.  Countries in this region refused to give help to America. Pakistan could have done the same. We didn’t need America. This one decision of Musharraf destroyed the whole life of ours. The period after '99 is responsible for the state in which a common Pakistani is living today.

Prashant: How are things now when you have democracy?

Ayesha: This democracy is even worse than that dictatorship because this democracy has arrived in the same way in which Musharraf’s dictatorship came. As per the Election Commission’s report, out of 18 crore population, only 90 lakh votes were genuine the rest were fake. So, this government is not chosen by us but by fake votes. So, how can something that that we have not chosen be good for us?

Prashant: Are there any changes in the life?

Ayesha:  Disastrous changes. In 5-6 years, the ‘roti’ that we bought for 2 rupay we buy it for 10 rupay (and that too smaller sized roti). When we wanted to curse someone and didn’t want it to come true, we would say – “may he get killed in a bomb blast or some bomb gets dropped on him” because we thought this is just not possible to happen.  But now if you say this to anyone you are abusing him. Things weren’t as bad before.

Awais: To sum up, I’d say two things: Before 99 there was democracy to a certain extent. At least the people were happy. When the dictatorship came, the people were disturbed. Musharraf took a few decisions which disturbed things. In the follow-up, he did such works that the bomb blasts started. When the bomb blasts started not only did the internal peace got impacted but we started becoming infamous in the world. After this, we got democracy. And as Ayesha said, this is worse than the dictatorship. No one in Pakistan is staying in peace.  The situation is such that if you go to a big city, say Peshawar, then you don’t know whether you would come back home safely. 

The situation is such that if you go to a big city, say Peshawar, then you don’t know whether you would come back home safely. 

Prashant: Let’s talk about Bangladesh. Before ’71, it was East Pakistan now it is Bangladesh. What’s your take on the whole episode?

Ayesha:  In the election of ’71, the majority was that of people of Bangladesh and they were to form their government and have their prime minister. Bhutto may have done a lot of good work but his biggest mistake or rather sin was that he divided Pakistan for his own ego.  He made Mujibur Rahman a culprit – even in our course books say Mujibur Rahman was the culprit and spread that India was supporting the divide and Mujibur Rahman. Even if India was supporting him, the mistake was Bhutto's – the mistake was our own.  Why will a third person interfere in your home? Only if you make a mistake will a third person interfere and take advantage of it. Even if India did anything wrong, we were the reason behind it. He, only for his ego and to come to power, divided Pakistan into two parts. 

Bhutto may have done a lot of good work but his biggest mistake or rather sin was that he divided Pakistan for his own ego.

Prashant: Osama Bin Laden has been killed in Pakistan. As local people what is your take on it?

Ayesha: Osama Bin Laden was not in Pakistan so there is no question of his being caught there. He most definitely didn’t get killed there. America killed Saddam Hussain in the public. Osama was a bigger criminal. ‘Toh use paani mein kyon baha diya?’ America just needed an excuse to get out of Afghanistan because it was badly stuck there. The simplest way for this was – Pakistan is anyway infamous. Do a drama of killing him in Pakistan. ‘Apne logon ko yeh toffee khila do ki’ – Osama is dead so we don’t have any reason to stay in Afghanistan. ‘Apni jaan chhuda lo; sab kuchh inke sar pe dal do’ . Destroy our whole economy and damage all our relations and escape.

Prashant: After that, Taliban’s leader, umm…

Ayesha: Mullah Omar?

Prashant:  Mullah Omar is said to have been killed in Pakistan.

Awais: It is rumour.

Prashant: Rumor?

Awais:  If we talk of Saddam Husain, if America wanted to hang him they could have done it in a closed jail but they showed it – the whole world saw; they showed it even till the rope was pulled. If they have killed Osama, then at least show the body.  How many times will you kill one person? To share a little story – I got an SMS the other day – ‘We heard that Osama got killed in 2005, then in 2008, in 2009, 2011. We’ll hear that he got killed in 2015. How many times will you kill him yaar. Even Start Plus doesn’t kill so many times!’

Ayesha: Mullah Omar may as well be in Pakistan. If he is in Pakistan then CIA must be protecting him.  Who else is protecting? CIA can take an insect out from beneath the earth.  If he was in Pakistan from last 5 years then why didn’t they catch him before? If they came to know in March that he’s there then why did CIA wait till May? For their own benefits. If he was in Pakistan then it’s not because Pakistanis have sheltered him but because CIA would have hidden him there.

 We heard that Osama got killed in 2005, then in 2008, in 2009, 2011. We’ll hear that he got killed in 2015. How many times will you kill him yaar. Even Start Plus doesn’t kill so many times!’

Prashant:  What is the perception of the people of Pakistan about the 26/11 episode? How do people perceive it?

Ayesha:  People are somewhat neutral about it. Even in the Talibanization of Pakistan, they have involved Pakistani nationals. Anyone can be ‘spoiled’ in exchange of money.  We don’t support any terrorist activity whether in India or in Pakistan, whether committed by Indian or Pakistani. If Ajmal Kasab was a major culprit, it doesn’t matter whether he was a Pakistani national; what matters is what he has done. He should be punished according to his deed.

Awais: Situation in Mumbai is similar to that in Karachi. You can pay anyone to kill. As Ayesha said, Ajmal Kasab could have been used. Another thing that we see is that if there is a bomblast here, it is said that it is done by Pakistan. If there is a bomb blast in Pakistan it is said that it is done by India. These are possibilities. I personally feel that if there shouldn’t be any bomb blast in India because of Pakistan. Similarly, maybe you also feel the same. If Ajmal Kasab has done what he’s claimed to have done then he should be punished.

Ayesha: The problem is – a lot of times things don’t reach the aam admi. What reaches people is what they want, what they can cash. They are playing with emotions of the people and twisting facts accordingly.  Maybe he is a Pakistani. Maybe he did what is said he did. If he’s done then he should get punished accordingly, regardless of whether he an Indian national, Pakistani national or American national. Raymond David wasn’t spared for what he did in Pakistan. Similarly, if Ajmal Kasab did the miscreant then he shouldn’t be spared.

Prashant: The bottom line is that people of both the countries want ‘aman’.

Ayesha: Exactly.

Prashant:  No one wants bomb blast anywhere.

Ayesha: And who dies in it? An ordinary Indian. What is his mistake? He is also human like us, eats-drinks like us.  He also has aims like we have.  If he’s loyal to his country then it’s good. If he thinks well about India, then he should – it’s logical. If someone staying in Pakistan and thinks against Pakistan then he is mad, he will be bad for us. We cannot consider someone (Indian) as our enemy because he thinks well about India.

Prashant: If someone can think ill for his country then he can think ill for other country as well.

Ayesha: Exactly. 

 We don’t support any terrorist activity whether in India or in Pakistan, whether committed by Indian or Pakistani.

Prashant: Coming to women literacy. About 25% of the women are literate. Even lesser women enter work force.

Ayesha:  The problem of illiteracy is not limited to women. Everyone in Pakistan – men or women - should be provided education. Employment opportunity should also be available to all. However,  I would support for employment opportunity for men. In our society, men are supposed to earn the money for the house. The women earns money for jewelries, bags, parties, etc.  Instead of giving the 10,000 rupay to a women, if you give it a man, he would run the whole ‘khandaan’. So, I wouldn’t support women getting more employment. If a woman really needs to take care of her family financially then it makes sense. For women who do it ‘shaukiya’, I don’t think they should get the opportunity. Instead, if that opportunity is given to a man, then he can run the whole ‘khandaan’.           

Prashant: What about ambition of women?

Ayesha: I don’t think that if you are sitting at home and raising the family you are doing anything less than anyone. You are doing more than the man. You are preparing the next generation and taking care of the whole house. Yours is the biggest contribution. Because, no man can do that. No man can do that. No matter what a man does, he cannot run a house like a woman. If you leave the house on a man, he messes up everything. Instead of leaving the house to some third person, if a woman is taking care of her family then she is doing nothing lesser than anyone. Allah Miya – God – Bhagwan, who has created things that way, knows more than us.

Awais: From mainstreaming perspective, we have some plans and we will see literacy rates higher in a few years in Pakistan.

Ayesha: Education should be for everyone. It is not necessary that if someone is educated then he/she should do job.

Prashant: Finally a question on cricket. In IPL, no Pakistani players were selected. There was a lot of media reaction around it.

Awais: There should be some reaction. If you look at that time, the Pakistani team was very strong.

Prashant: But in IPL it’s all divided

Awais: Yes. It does get divided. But why the celebrities didn’t select them? I have this question from you.

Prashant: In the media it was told that they were invited.

Awais:  Is it that IPL had some problem with ‘Lahore Badshah’?

Prashant: There are two views on this. One is that the selectors didn’t select them for their own reasons. The other thing that was floating around was that it was the same year that 26/11 happened and because of which they were not selected.

Awais: I’d like to quote something from the Indian media. The celebrities were bounded to not select Pakistanis.  What about it?

Prashant:  As Shah Rukh Khan said in his media bite…

Awais: Main Shoab Akhtar ko lena chah raha tha but due to some reasons couldn’t take him

Prashant: So, everyone had their own answers for not selecting any Pakistani player. But another view was also that it was the year of 26/11.

Awais: As far as IPL is concerned, despite there is no Pakistani, but people in Pakistan do see IPL. Right now as the finals are going on, there are people who would have closed their shops or left their offices to see IPL. So, there should be some Pakistanis. Now, how is it possible? I think the factor is – ‘Indian Premiere League’. So, why have ‘Lahore Badshah’ in it.

Ayesha: I think IPL is not an issue. Those playing in IPL played for money – neither for India nor for Pakistan. It is up to the selectors to choose you. They don’t select you based on your passport. They select based on your skills. Instead, if Inda or ICC forbids Pakistani players in India, then it would be a matter of provocation. If someone is not getting selected in IPL, then there is no need of creating an India-Pakistan issue out of it because the person is playing for money and not for India/Pakistan.

If someone is not getting selected in IPL, then there is no need of creating an India-Pakistan issue out of it because the person is playing for money and not for India/Pakistan.

Prashant: We’ve come to the last leg of our interview. This is on the lines of ‘Rapid Fire Round’ in Koffee with Karan. You need to say whatever comes first to your mind (Apparently, they were familiar with Koffee with Karan and the Rapud Fire!)

Prashant: India

Ayesha: Incredible

Awais: Same as Pakistan

Prashant: China

Ayesha: Friend

Awais: Next super power

Prashant: US

Awais: Bull shit

Ayesha: A true rival

Prashant: Taliban

Ayesha: Nothing

Awais: Not Muslims

Prashant: Al Qaeda

Ayesha: Another name for CIA

Awais: Agreed

Prashant: Shah Rukh Khan

Ayesha:  A good actor

Awais: Celebrity

Prashant: Sachin Tendulkar

Ayesha: He’s a celebrity

Awais: Celebrity

Prashant: Mohammad Ali Jinnah

Awais: Great Leader

Ayesha: Mohammad Ali Jinnah… was a… great leader

Prashant: Madrasas

Awais: Some religious schools

Ayesha: Wrongly implemented.

Madrasa basically means school. Even ‘Talib’ means someone who’s struggling for knowledge. Even Madrasas were a good place whose term has been wrongly used. It’s our mis-interpretation

Prashant: So, we are misinterpreting the term, Madrasa

Ayesha: Yes we are misinterpreting the term and we have started implementing it in a wrong way. In Pakistan I have seen Madrasas which teaches religion as well as computer. I’d call it the right madrasa. Madrasa is not where you are taught Talibanization. That is not madrasa

Prashant: Lashkar-e-toiba

Awais: No Comments

Ayesha: Lashkar-e-taiyyaba… It was initiated as a group who would work for human rights in a way which they thought was correct. Maybe, the one who started it, started it with right intentions and maybe who are taking it forward are doing it in a wrong way. Basically, the concept was pertaining to human rights. If people running it are wrong then the blame shouldn’t go to people who started it. If a few people of a religion does something wrong, the blame goes to the person and not the whole religion.

Thanks, once again, Awais and Ayesha for speaking to the people of India and through the Internet to the people of the world. I am also thankful to SAYC for giving us the platform where such candid, people-to-people discussion could happen. Hope a lot of misconceptions about Pakistan has been cleared in this!

Pakistan, in person

Pakistan, our most loved and hated neighbor! Pakistan is very similar to India yet the border between them is the most dangerous border in the world. Sitting on this side of the border, from the Indian, western and the Pakistani media, we have a mental image of Pakistan. The South Asian Youth Conference gave me an opportunity to interact with the youth of Pakistan. In the one week I was at the Conference, I made good friends with the Pakistani delegates. In fact, by the end of the conference it was very difficult to differentiate the Pakistani delegates from Indian delegates.

I had a candid, politically incorrect and real interview with the Pakistani delegates. The interview touched upon the life of aam admi in Pakistan and sensitive issues like 9/11 and 26/11. Below is the first of the two-part interview with two common citizens of Pakistan.

Note: The interview, which was in Hindi/Urdu, has been translated and transliterated below. Some Hindi/Urdu words and language specific constructs are kept as is to reduce the harm caused by translation.Please excuse the grammatical errors in this post.

Prashant: We will start with a brief introduction:

Awais: My name is Muhammad Awais Awan. I have come from Pakistan to attend South Asian Youth Conference. I am associated with United Nations' Youth Advisory Panel which gives policy level inputs for its different youth programs.

Ayesha: As-Salamu-Alaykum. My name is Ayesha Ilyas. I am from Peshawar, Pakistan. I am doing honors in communication design. I have done bachelors in mass communication. I am a political activist and a writer.

Prashant: Is this your first visit to India?

Ayesha: No, this is my second visit. Before this, I had come to India as a SAARC delegate for the National Youth Festival of India which was held at Orissa.

Prashant: So how do you find India?

Ayesha: India... India is somewhat similar to ours. I even like it a lot for things where it is different.

Prashant: What are the similarities and where do you think India differs from Pakistan?

Ayesha: The language is similar. The dressing sense is somewhat similar. To a certain extent the cuisine is also similar. The environment is similar. Values in Pakistan and India are also similar. The difference comes in religion and in the increasing western influence. The area I belong to have some restrictions. Yep. That’s it.

Awais: This is my first visit to India. I have found a lot of things similar to that in Pakistan. According to me our dressing sense, customs and culture are similar. Even religious scenario is similar to a certain extent – there are Hindus there, there are Hindus here. There are Musalmaan there, there are Musalmaan here. The difference lies in the fact that the religions that are in majority here are in minority there and religions that are in majority here are in minority there.

Prashant: So, what are the dissimilarities?

Awais: Dissimilarity lies in the way things are rapidly changing due to western influence. Otherwise, we are 95% similar.

  We are 95% similar.

Prashant: What do people do on weekends there?

Ayesha: On weekends, people like to spend time with their families. People also hangout with their friends and go to hotels. Parties and family functions are also hosted on weekends normally.

Prashant: In Bangalore there is this ‘pub culture’. How prevalent are pubs/discos there?

Ayesha: In Karachi and in Islamabad these things, along with western influence, are developing. But in other parts of Pakistan it is not considered good.

Awais: Only in the big cities, people party on weekends. Otherwise people spend time with their family and relatives. Government employees and other employees do a little household work

Prashant: So, pubs and discos are not considered good there.

Awais: No. Not considered good.

Ayesha: No.

Prashant: In India, cricket and films are religions. People are passionate about them. Is it the same in Pakistan?

Ayesha: Cricket is valued in the same way. Film industry of Pakistan is almost dead. Indian movies are taken seriously. Hollywood movies are also viewed to a certain extent. But, mostly, people are passionate about cricket.

Prashant: During the India-Pakistan semi-finals it was almost ‘bandh’ here. Offices were closed.

Ayesha: Exactly. In Pakistan, big screens were set up to screen the matches.

 Prashant: After 9/11 there is a new term that is floating in the media – ‘Islamic terrorism’. What is your take on this?

Ayesha: Apparently, people who suffered in 9/11 are the ones who started ‘Islamic terrorism’. If anyone brought Osama Bin Laden to Afghanistan, then it was CIA. If anyone supported Taliban, then it was CIA. If 9/11 was done by Taliban, then America reaped whatever they had sowed. If there is something called ‘Islamic Terrorism’ then it is neither initiated by any Islamic scholar nor by any Islamic country. So, you cannot call it ‘Islamic’. It would have been ‘Islamic’ if it were initiated by us. It isn’t Islamic. The super powers, for its own benefits, have twisted the meaning of ‘Islam’ and presented it to the people. Basically, all the extremist/terrorist beliefs are in conflict with Islam; there is no match with Islam.

Awais: I don’t understand, ‘what is Islamic terrorism’? If the Taliban are doing suicide bombing, then my question is: If they are musalmaan, then why do they bomb a masjid? A mazaar? An imam bargah? At this point the biggest problem we have is that there a lot of suicide bombings happening in Pakistan. So, even we don’t know who these people are. According to me they are not musalmaan.

Ayesha: In fact, most of us think they are not musalmaan. Everyone says they are not musalmaan.

Awais: I had attended a national level conference in Islamabad. Pakistan government had arrested some 40 suicide bombers. The scholars who analyzed them were of the opinion that the suicide bombers were totally misguided. And Islam teaches harmony.

Ayesha: Islam actually means

Awais: ‘Salaamati’

Ayesha: ‘Salaamati’ means peace. There is no concept of terrorism in Islam.

If the Taliban are doing suicide bombing, then my question is: 'If they are musalmaan, then why do they bomb a masjid?'

Prashant: What assumptions did you have about South Asia – things that media has fed us with? Did you find any of these assumptions invalid and that the reality is something different?

Ayesha: Like other conferences this conference would also be ‘eat, meet and greet’. I had assumed this. If we have come here, then it’s only as a vacation and a waste of time. After coming here, I realized that it is not really a waste of time. One thing that we gained from here is that we got to know about people and we told people about us. If we have made a lot of friends here, it only means that we have shown a good picture. The seriousness with which each issue is discussed and the kind of speakers that are invited make me believe that the organizers really wanted to do something and the ‘Action Plan’ that we are making makes me believe that something positive is going to come from this conference.

Prashant: In our minds, we always have presumptions about people. This person will be like this and that person will be like that. Like, for Afghanistan, the image is that there is always some or the other bombing happening there. Because this is what we read about them. But after coming here, we got to know that there is life there. Did the image that media created in our minds change in this conference?

Ayesha: I had interacted with the South Asian people before so I was pretty clear. Neither India is what its government portrays nor Nepalis are outcast type of people. I had a good experience with them. They are good and very sincere people. I had also met the Sri Lankans before. This is my first meet with the Bangladeshis. I presumed that the Bangladeshis hated us. And even if they did so, they are not wrong. But after coming here I realized that they have a soft corner for us. This was my first interaction with Maldivians. This is also going great. They are very sweet people.

Awais: I agree with Ayesha. As you said that media portrays a different image, I was asked by people from all countries that everyday there is a bomb-blast in Pakistan then how do you people live? I hope that in the 5-6 days I have spent here, the misconception of people is reduced.

I presumed that the Bangladeshis hated us. And even if they did so, they are not wrong. But after coming here I realized that they have a soft corner for us.

Prashant: Gandhi, Jinnah, Nehru, Bhutto - Benazir Bhutto - four great politicians in their own rights. How do people of Pakistan see them? We’ll take them one at a time. Gandhi?

Awais: We can’t take them one at a time. Benazir Bhutto is after…

Ayesha: She’s not in that league

Awais: Gandhi. Jinnah. Nehru. According to me these were our leaders who fought for our freedom. Initially we freedom from the British. The ‘do qaumi nazaria’ (two nation theory) came later. They fought for the whole ‘Hindustan’ – the concept of Pakistan comes later.

Prashant: Are they looked with the same reverence with which they are in India?

Awais: Absolutely. As I said, ‘do qaumi nazaria’ came later.

Prashant: But the ‘do qaumi nazaria’ came from them. It is said that Gandhi divided India.

Ayesha: Gandhi didn’t divide. Jinnah was in favor of united India and he trusted Gandhi and liked him till the end. Given the way Gandhi struggled for India – and that time we were all one. So, given the way he struggled for us also, he is our hero as well. Nehru was somewhat ‘with’ British. If Pakistan and India got partitioned and there were problems which arose after the partition, then Nehru had a role to play in them. Jinnah is our leader. Jinnah is our hero. It was the need of the hour that we separated and Jinnah realized that before anyone else. So, I appreciate his vision.

Awais: Jinnah is the greatest. As for Gandhi, Gandhi had his own way of doing things. He got his demands fulfilled through ‘aman’ (non-violence). Look at his campaigns. He worked his way through ‘aman’ and without bloodshed.

Ayesha: After the partition also, in the context of sharing resources with Pakistan – where Nehru and British were creating a little problem, Gandhi was the person who protest for Pakistan that it gets its resources. Gandhi, basically, was a person who wasn’t biased and understood the need of the hour. The problems were created by politicians who came after him. If the things were in his and Jinnah’s hand then the relationship would have been very good.

Jinnah was in favor of united India

Prashant: Coming to Benazir Bhutto…

Awais: She was the first female prime minister.

Prashant: What about her assassination? It appeared that she was going to come to power.

Ayesha: First of all, one thing to appreciate about her is that she took over her father’s party at a very crucial time. It was a big thing. At that time, not even in India or in the west, women weren’t strong enough to lead the whole party. What made her a ‘hero’ was not her personal capability. She started off her father’s work. She didn’t create her own identity. The first identity of Benazir Bhutto was Zulfikar Ali Bhutto. The government of Benazir Bhutto was one of the most corrupt governments of Pakistan. The perception of people is that when she spent her interim time in Dubai, she had changed her mind and she had become better. Maybe, if she would have gotten a chance again she would have been good. But since she didn’t get a chance how can I assume that she was good? As for her assassination… there is some confusion in Pakistan. However, it appears that though her assassination was blamed on Taliban, the current President, her husband, was involved in it. In Pakistan and India and in our region, the government which comes to power is not the one that the  'awaam' wants. The government which comes to power is the one that the super powers want. So, maybe, it was a game. Most probably, it was a game.

The government which comes to power is not the one that the 'awaam' wants. The government which comes to power is the one that the super powers want.

[Stay tuned for more on dictatorship in Pakistan and on 26/11.

If you have any queries regarding lives of aam admi in Pakistan and their view on things, do drop in your question below and I'll try to get them answered. Also note that the above comments are not from any Pakistani government official. They are from common citizens ]

PS: Thanks VikramAdith Raman for suggesting the title of this post and giving inputs on the formatting!

Edited later: The second part of the interview is here

The McKinsey Way: Book Review

McKinsey is a very big brand in both the consulting and non-consulting world. If someone has heard of just one management consulting company, it would be McKinsey & Company. In fact I have heard people leaving a better paying job for McKinsey. Such is a brand of McKinsey. And when I came across The McKinsey Way by Ethan M. Rasiel, I couldn't help but read it. The McKinsey Way appeared to be a self-help book. I don't generally read self-help books (especially after reading The Monk Who Sold His Ferrari by Robin Sharma). But the buzz around this book like anything else related to McKinsey drove me towards reading it.

The book is divided into five parts. The first part talks about how to think about business problems. It mentions a few frameworks to represent the problem. These frameworks helps in looking at different aspects of the problem and attribute importance to each factor. The second part of the book talks about what actually goes into solving a problem - gathering a team, brainstorming, conducting interviews, researching and managing hierarchy - and how to do them effectively. The third part of the book deals with selling the solution while the fourth and the fifth part touches upon 'how to survive at McKinsey' and 'life after McKinsey'.

If there is one centralized theme of the book and one take-away from the book, both explicit and implicit, it's STRUCTURE. Right from the anecdotes mentioned in the book to the way in which the book is written - everything is structured. Rasiel describes the importance of structuring anything and everything - thoughts, email, presentation. Another theme that I found through out the book is 'putting yourself in other person's shoe'. He talks about elevator pitches where a consultant has very short time to sell his idea. If he has structured his solution and thinks form the client's perspective - chances are high that he would be able to sell his idea.

Leafing through the less-than-200 pages, one also forms an idea about the life of a McKinsey-ite. Rasiel reinforces that generally held notion that consultants put in real long hours. He also mentions about the crazy travel one has to undertake and its impact on the family life. Another thing that can be inferred from the book is that the consulting world has really high attrition so much so that it has become 'normal'. To quote from the book - "As one former McKinsey-ite told me (Rasiel), leaving McKinsey is never a question of whether - it's a question of when. We used to say that the half-life of a class of new associates is about two years - by the end of that time, half will have left the Firm." Attrition in the consulting world is one thing i want to write on, but in due time.

The book is an easy read. Rasiel has used McKinsey jargon profusely throughout the book. However he has explained them before using them. For people who have not used 'frameworks' in their work, it's a good introduction to the usefulness of frameworks. The book is designed such that one can start from any chapter and still make sense out of it. One needn't go cover-to-cover. However, I would recommend reading it from cover-to-cover.

Overall, the book makes a good read for a three hour flight or drive. It reinforces a lot of commonsensical yet very important things - especially structuring ones thoughts and communication. For people mulling a career in consulting - this book could be your yet another source of information about the consulting world.

Aruna Shanbaug: It's my life

I am now qualified as a senior citizen. I would have got tax exemption on 2.5 lakh of my salary and concession in the railways as well. But then, things don't always work as planned. Like a lot of senior citizens, I don't earn anything to get any tax exemption. And I don't go anywhere. Nowhere. I have seen people living in the slums of Dharavi where each person gets about 20 sq ft of space to live. I live in almost equal space - the only difference is that I don't move. In fact, I can't move and haven't moved by myself for last 37 years. Some people call me soul. Some call me life. Some call me sub-conscious. A few techies these days even call me the software. I am the 'real person' within the body of the most popular living nurse in India, Aruna Shanbaug. I am the 'red' of the Aruna. I am the 'shaan' of the Shanbaug. I am the the real Aruna Shanbaug.

I was always amazed at the hegemony of the mankind. Man decides which animals to rear and which to kill. Man decides which plants to grow. Man not only decides the fate of plants and animals but also of other people. Today, it was my turn. My fate was to be decided. Whether I would live or die was to be decided by a few people. I didn't commit any crime. On the contrary, I am a victim. But still. They would decide whether I would live or die.

Through all these last 37 years, Pinki has been my best friend. She really cares for me. But one thing that hurts me the most is the pain Pinki is going through. Pinki is in pain because she can't see me suffering through the agony. She can't see me bearing the pain for 37 years. And she fights for a very noble cause - of giving me freedom from my sufferings. These days, while the children send their parents to old-age homes, Pinki has been by my side. I'll be indebted to her throughout my 'life' and beyond - if there's anything after life.

But I am brave. I am full of life. I believe in miracles, science and the divine power. I believe that I will see the light of the day. I'll eat the best of fish and listen to Aamir Khan's 'O palan hare' composed by A R Rahman and written by Javed Akhtar. I believe that the medical science will make enough progress that I would be treated. If not tomorrow, next year. If not next year - after ten years. I want to live.

We consider committing suicide a crime. A person cannot even attempt to take his own life even though he is suffering from insurmountable mental stress. But when it comes to my case - no one even bothered to know what I want - whether I want to live or die. But I can't blame them. How would they know what I want? I have no way to communicate to them that I want to live, that i want to go through this pain and hope that someday I can move by myself. After all, it's the hope that keeps everyone alive and motivates people to persevere. Didn't the "mentally slow, unsociable, and adrift forever in foolish dreams" boy who was expelled form school grow up to become Albert Einstein? It is hope. Hope - that made they kept going. I believe that medical science would make enough progress in the next few years that I'll recover. And despite what the doctors say - I have hope and faith that I shall be back. And my wish is that I want to live - live till I can possibly live.

Today a few supreme people on the bench decided my future. I shall live. I don't know if I need to thank them to give me something that is as much mine as anything can get - my life.  But, nevertheless, I'll thank them for not taking away what they could have. It's my life and let me and only me decide what's enough for me and how much I can bear. If I am not able to communicate it to you, please leave me to myself.

Please don't show mercy on me.

From pictures of pets and ousting Mubarak to ...?

In 2005, very few people knew social media. They then slowly started using it to share their lives with their friends. And by 2011, they have an integral role in ousting Ben Ali and Mubarak. The thought of where the social media would be in 2015 is overwhelming. I asked a few friends of mine for their views on the state of social media 5 years down the line and here's what they have to say:

"What do you think is the future of social media? Where do you see it 5 years down the line?"


Maliha Mariyam: Social media is a communication platform. As the world economy is changing the way ppl use it will change. It will revolutionize a few more industries - like it has already revolutionized - books, retail, travel. Banking is on the way. It's going to be interesting 5 years.

Olivia Mukhopadhyay: The social media is getting better everyday so 5 years down the line it is going to still remain a great mode of communication and it will play a bigger role in advertisement and brand building. We can see emergence of corporate networks for people to direct their questions and grievances and social media will form a bigger role in opinion formation. It will eventually affect politics and maybe open up better policy discussions the same thing normal media should do but cant because they have got to run a business social forum is more open less personal and hence provides a good platform for people to speak up.

Harshika Nahar: It's future still seems to be gloomy. Today the youth have the intelligence to judge,and react, comment but that's it. Given the impact social media may have, most governments would ban it - as is seen in China. Just commenting on a national issue would not matter unless there's someone who would really take action on it. it's just written, "liked", commented and forgotten.

Mithun Karmakar: FBI is going to use it to screw you. Keeping an eye on what you post or share. They might use that information to form your profile; A matter of privacy, I mean. Social media is making the world know about you more - a bit too much. Remember the blackberry case in US? Common people don't always care about what others might use this information for.

It might start voicing people's opinion in a structured manner. Like govt polls on important issues, election polls, etc.

We can already see blogs, mails etc are already integrated into one Google account. This integration is going to be even widespread in simpler words one networks for all your internet needs.

Facebook started with hot chicks pics but now has taken the shape of what we see it now.. if it had stuck to that i don't think it would have crossed the great oceans. While Twitter has become more of a shouting tool than social network.


Pallav Jhawar: Social media is replacing traditional advertising, replacing traditional ways of reading and sharing news, replacing traditional ways in which NGOs raise funds, putting something like RTI on the web. i can go on and on. Five years down the line, it would be possible to take a video of yourself saying something like had a great lunch pointing to your lunch and upload it as a status on Facebook.

I ask the same question to my readers - what do you think is the future of social network is? Where do you see it heading five years down the line? For a change, I'll reserve my comments for a later post

Disclaimer: The comments mentioned above are the sole responsibility of their writers. The accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed.

PS: The interviewees were not given any time to prepare for the interview. In fact they didn't have any clue that I would conduct an interview. The question was asked to them at 1:30 am and they are required to give answers off the top of their head. The answers published are uncensored and picked from chat window - so please pardon the grammatical errors!

The Revolt of 1857

[Disclaimer: All characters, places, institutes, organizations and incidents appearing in this work are fictitious. Any resemblance to any real persons (living or dead), places (not even India, Tunisia and Egypt), institutes, organizations and incidents is purely coincidental. ]


Flitter and Chasebook, two information sharing tools, were developed in the early 1850 in the USA. In no time they had become immensely popular throughout the world. By 1852, almost 3% of the Indian subcontinent had access to Flitter or Chasebook.

In 1854 Royal Small Arms Factory started producing a new, long rifle which would help the British Army in a bayonet fight. The rifle was extensively used in the Crimean war and was later introduced in the British colonies. Mangal, a soldier in the Bengal Native Infantry heard that the cartridges used in these rifles were greased with pork or beef fat. He started fleeting (messages updated through ‘Flitter’ are called ‘fleets’ and the act is called ‘fleeting’) against the East India Company on Flitter and created a page on Chasebook to protest against the introduction of such rifle. His messages were read by his fellow soldiers in Bengal and started getting agitated. His family and friends back home in Uttar Pradesh also joined the Chasebook page. Soon, the soldiers of all the regiments under the East India Company became aware of the insensitivity of the East India Company towards the Indian sensibilities. The soldiers in all the regiments started protesting against the use of the Enfield Rifles. Bakht Khan developed a training routine and videos for the sepoys in Meerut and shared it through Chasebook with the other regiments. The Madras Army and the Bombay army were also facing racism as the soldiers were not given higher ranks despite their qualifications.

In the civil society, Fleets and Chasebook feeds had been floating around about the Company’s attempt to convert the population of India which was then predominantly Hindu and Muslim into Christian. In fact, the few progressive measures taken by the Company – like abolishing Sati system and widow-remarriage – were looked upon with suspicion by the people.

The Company, in the name of ‘taxes’ started looting India of its gold, jewels, silk, cotton, etc. A Zamindari system was introduced which burdened the farmers with unprecedented taxes. A lot of them were forced to switch to farming commercial crops like indigo, jute, coffee and tea. This reduced the supply of food crops and hence there was a scarcity of food which led to price rise of the food crop. The poor could no longer afford food. Thousands of workers lost job when the handlooms closed down due to competition from the cheap factory made goods. Essentially, everyone in India was directly impacted by the oppression of the Company.

Let’s come back to the rebelling sepoys. Mangal was preparing to revolt against the Company and tried teaching a couple of Europeans a lesson. He was however arrested and sentence to death. Sohan in Kolkata got the fleet about Mangal’s death and re-fleeted it. Soon the incident became viral on the social media. Laxmi, the queen of Jhansi, who was ousted by the Company also created mass awareness through her Chasebook notes. Nana Sahib, Tantia Tope, Jwala Pershad organized protests in Cawnpore.

People in all parts of the country – in Lahore, in Madras, in Dhaka, in Oudh, in Jodhpur - took to the street. Hridayanath, a resident of Shyambazar, Bengal Presidency, created a Chasebook event to assemble at the Chandni Chauk to protest against the Company. All his friends and their friends and their friend’s friends joined the cause. Several other ‘squares’ were identified in the country where people would assemble for their ‘liberation’. There was a mass uprising. Ajmal, from Faridkot, took a rifle and open fired at the Company officials until he was arrested. Baanya, who stayed in Mizoram had his Chasebook wall flooded with updates form friends who were “showing off” by sharing the news of their heroic deeds in chasing the Company out. ‘Fleets’ of the news of Lakshmi’s, Tantia and others success started becoming viral and a Baanya, a Raghunathan, and an Ajmal started drawing motivation from them and joined the protest against the Company.

By the time the Company realized the intensity of the protest and blocked Chasebook and Flitter, the uprising had moved out of the hand and had spiral out. Mass protests in every nook and corner of the country eventually led to an end of Company’s close to 100 years of exploitation. India became one of the first few countries in the world to be free.

Getting live updates about the development in India, people from Sri Lanka, Hongkong and a host of other colonies started their protest movements. The freedom movement by India had a domino effect and by 1867, 10 years after Mangal's first ‘fleeted’ about the Enfield Rifles, all the colonies directly or indirectly under the Great Britain got freedom

Ms. Meena: After-thoughts

There are somethings that money can't buy. But is justice one of them? Or, can it be bought? What is the price of a person's life? of his lie? What all can credit/loan do?

These are some of the questions which the play, Ms. Meena, revolves around. Ms Meena, a play by Chennai based Perch group, written by Rashmi Ruth Devadasan and directed by Rajiv Krishnan, is inspired by Der Besuch der alten Dame (The Visit) by Friedrich Dürrenmatt. The play revolved around Ms Meena, the protagonist of the play.

Ms. Meena, is a very successful film star who has made a fortune in her 20 years career. The play starts with the news that Ms Meena is visiting Pichampuram, the village where she hails from. The village is under abject poverty. The villagers are hopeful that she would be able to bring in money to the village. The villagers are convincing Ravi, her Pichampuram day's lover, to talk Ms. Meena out into helping the village.

Ms. Meena, finally, arrives. The village is overwhelmed and hopeful. Ms. Meena announces that she would make a movie on her life and will shoot it at Pichampuram. This would bring in a lot of tourists to Pichampuram, thus, making it prosperous. However, she, has a condition. She wants Ravi to be dead in return.

The audience then discovers that Ravi had ditched Asha (who later one went on becoming the uber-successful Ms. Meena). He had refused to marry her even after finding that she was carrying his child. He went on to marry the daughter of a Kirana store as that would boost his career. So, Asha had come back to the village to take the revenge.

The whole village, initially, supports Ravi and says that he has nothing to worry about. However, the expectation of fortune led the villagers buy a lot of things on credit and they were soon under debts. Also, their personal ambition of working in a movie made them take Ms. Meena's side. Finally, the movie is made. The villagers kill Ravi and his life-size statue is put of at the entrance of the village.

The story of the play is not unusual. It has an expected ending and an expected flow. What made this play different is the way the artists created the sound and the landscapes. We get the first glimpse of this when the artists made sound of a helicopter heralding the arrival of Ms. Meena. The artists, throughout the play, seamlessly transforms from human characters to the elements of the surroundings - like waterfall, birds, trees, etc. The first time i had heard of artists becoming non-human characters was in the sitcom Sarabhai Vs Sarabhai. [This is one topic - review of Sarabhai Vs Sarabhai - which i have been thinking of writing on from a long time]. My second, and first-hand encounter was with the theatre workshop i attended conducted by "Yours Truly" Group, of which yours truly is a part. There we became basin, commode, wax in the ear, etc. I found it very funny and strange until later i figured how it fell in place. Anyway, The perch of the birds, the gushing of the wind, the sound of a moving bus, the sound of a moving train were all done by the artists. Their transformation from a bus to a train to normal villagers was something i saw as an audience for the first time.

The one thing that struck me the most about the play was the vulnerability of humans beings. The fact that Ms. Meena was successful in giving her own justice outside of the legal system is due to the gullibility of the villagers. This reminds of the recession and the sub-prime crises that started from Sept 2008. People had easy availability of loan. This made them buy things which they couldn't afford. But the math needs to be worked out. The money had to come form somewhere. Unfortunately, there was no such source. This eventually led to the recession*. Imagine, if some Ms. Meena would have offered to create wealth in the market in lieu of someone's life - i wonder how many people would have denied. Essentially, Ms. Meena took advantage of the poverty of the people (for which she was responsible) to serve her own purpose. I guess, a lot of politicians do this. Ms. Meena, in principle, bought justice - regardless of whether or not Ravi 'deserved' punishment.

If I were to remake this play, I would remake it from Ravi's perspective. I find Ravi's character very interesting. What would have gone through him when he ditched Asha for career advancement, when Ms. Meean enunciated 'her justice' and when the villagers were after his life? These are complex feelings and would be interesting to develop and portray.

Overall, it was a good play. I was hoping for a 'heavier' play and hence the light-hearted treatment of the play couldn't strike a chord with me. But the different style of presentation was good to watch.

Cheers!

*A very simplified/crude description