The case against OP.

 
When I commenced blogging, I resolved not to use this blog as a medium to illustrate how boring my life was. I wanted this blog to reflect whatever little ideas or thoughts I had on a host of subjects.(I have been unsuccessful so far) Today, its time to break that rule for I am going to deal with things I have seen/experienced personally. 
For the uninitiated, OP is like a rite of passage to a senior hall for the Kgpian. Its a euphemism for ragging, although vehemently denied by the brainwashed kind. For those looking for details, I recommend you check out KGP Files  which gives a detailed account of what the ritual is like. 
The one thing about OP that strikes you is how it has managed to keep its ugly head afloat all these years. Its not unreasonable to think that those who have gone through the ordeal will realize how unjust it is and resolve not to to let it happen to their juniors. Apparently, human psychology works in queer ways. An abused child goes on to be a perpetrator of sexual abuse when he grows up. Maybe, after having gone through OP, some students feel the need to let the system flourish as a way of trying to come to terms with what happened to them in second year (If I can do it, why cant these guys?)  [a.k.a Mother in law - daughter in law syndrome]
Essentially, the batch of second years can be divided into 3 sections. 
1. Pro-OP: These guys believe in the present way of going about things and believe that OP will benefit them in ways including but not limited to personality development, junior-senior interaction e.t.c. I have nothing personal against them. I respect their right to hold opinions and I expect them to respect my rights too. They form a minority.
2. Unsure: They form a chunk of the populace. Reared on statements like " OP will help you in the end" ."OP nahi diya to kaata ho jayega" , they feel they may miss out on something or the other during their stay. The fear of losing something is a very powerful motivator and it has been used successfully by marketers all around the globe. They don't like the things that happen during OP and want to opt out but are hesitant in opting out. 
3. Anti-OP: Then there is a minority that is completely against the idea. They believe that nothing worthwhile can be gained from a system like this. They also believe that they wont gain or lose anything by opting out. They know that the only people worth talking to are those who talk to you irrespective of whether you have given OP or not. 


So, as you can see the people who lose out are the people in the second group. They fall for the fallacy of Argumentum ad populum and are unable to opt out even if they want to. 
Now that we have picked out the guys who suffer because of a system like this, lets focus on the need for OP. 
Proponents of OP give a host of reasons for justifying the practice from the mundane to the philosophical. Philosophical reasons are often BS because most seniors being in the same age group are just as confused about life as the second years. 
The worthwhile reasons relate to GC performance, senior-junior interaction (sadomasochistic ? ) , a concept called hall tempo e.t.c
While I completely agree that some students will never participate in events unless they are forced to, the ethically right thing to do is to respect his wishes. If he wants to mug, he has the complete right to mug as much as he wants in his room without any disturbance whatsoever. Almost always, rights of people take a backseat. Students are sometimes forced into events without their consent. I find this one of the lesser controversial aspects of OP, nevertheless if you agree to this happening you must agree with totalitarian forms of governance because the underlying principle or logic behind them is the same. 

                     " You must do whatever I say because I know whats best for you."  
In principle, you are transgressing the rights of an individual to make his own choices in life and if you are okay with that, you must not be opposed to any form of totalitarianism because you have breached a fundamental rule.
Its not hard to imagine life in KGP in the 60's with little or no contact with the outside world. There was a need to keep the creative energy of the campus occupied with something worthwhile. The campus was cut-off from the rest of the world and so there was little to do besides academics. GC provided a welcome refreshment from the world of academics. Now, flashforward to the present. GC is just one of the things in an average KGPian's life who has a host of other things to attend to. GC's will definitely be viewed fondly by alumni but one must not forget that alternative avenues of expressing talent and creativity exist today. Those interested in GC events will work for them anyway without coercion once provided the right introduction. 
As for the interaction , I doubt how treating a junior with contempt for over a month, will lead to him being able to develop close bonds of friendship with his senior. From my personal experience, I have noticed that most second years dont hold their tormentors in high esteem. 
The most depraved thing about OP is however the fact that it is a system open to abuse by sadists on the lookout for ways to prep up their ego. OP is also like a test of character for a senior. There will be some who will not be able to handle the power OP comes with and end up making horrible mistakes that will scar his junior for life. An experiment to ascertain the effects of power  on humans has shown some shocking results. After all, being humans, everyone is prone to overstepping limits. We will keep hearing about isolated cases if the present way of going about things continues. 
Some may argue that when caught, most juniors refuse to testify against their seniors. Parallels can be drawn with this and the Stockholm syndrome. You see, survival of OP can be attributed to its manipulation of the human mind so effectively.
The bottomline is that OP is a ritual that has outgrown its utility and it needs to be discarded as soon as possible to develop alternative and humane ways to achieve the objectives that OP set out to achieve. I dont know what a perfect system is, but I do know that a system that doesnt change and adopt is imperfect. I can propose a lot of alternative systems that accomplish most of the OP objectives in a much better way. Allow the HCM to make it compulsory for students to attend Fresher's events. Much of the problem with attending forced meetings is the lack of legitimacy. With a seal of approval from the administration, most students will have no qualms about attending those events and will be sure of the meeting not degenerating into a second year bashing affair. Interaction in the presence of Professors is one alternative but we dont have to go to such great lengths.
A simple alternative will be to assign a senior to a junior or a group of seniors to a group of juniors and assign them to eat together in the mess for a day. Rotate this group around till everyone knows everyone else. The senior can ask for a 'Re' is unsatisfied with a junior. But at all times, both must treat each other with mutual respect. Besides the interaction, this system will also allow people with common interests to know each other and will be a true precursor to lasting friendships. I sincerely believe that an age gap of 2-3 years can never prevent people from being friends.The present system also prevents seniors and juniors from developing deep bonds on the basis of interests because true friendship can never spout between unequals (apparent unequals) This system will ensure that the hierarchy is lost and everyone treats each other as they ought to, like fellow human beings.  
I am open to working to ensure the end of this malaise and I request interested people who share my views to contact me so that we can chalk out a strategy for next year.

A moment to cherish.

The days were long and dreary,
The nights were short and scary,
With life, I had grown weary.

I glimpsed a doe,
With eyes so pure,
Unblemished,
Just like snow.

Her eyes met mine,
My realms changed forever,
My heart began to chime,
This sensation,I had faced,never.

The gentle rays of love,
Scorched my entire being,
With pain and misery came rapture,
The likes I had never seen.

The child in me awoke,
My flame was kindled,
In a disparate world,
Two roses mingled.

Is self-doubt really that bad?

The world loves confident people, doesn't it? PERHAPS we are biologically programmed to favor individuals displaying a trait of confidence over others exhibiting a degree of self-doubt. You know it and you have seen it. The public voting for that amazing politician who's such a good orator. The journalist who pronounces causalities like " Sensex down 12 points over inflation fears." or making judgments like "India needs to feed its poor before aiming for space"  without blinking her eye. The public has little grasp over the nuances of policy-making and subconsciously decides the best policy ,hence the politician over how confident they appear. Likewise, the cocksure journalist probably hasn't done her homework before pronouncing judgments which defy rationality. (A 12 point shift in the Sensex hardly indicates anything and the cost of Chandrayaan  was equal to the cost of a big airliner, hundreds of which ply over Indian skies at any given time) Yet, their arguments appear sound and convincing. Its no secret that the dumbest guys are most cocksure and aren't afraid of taking huge risks. 

In stark contrast, a rational and informed individual always appears hesitant , especially if you ask him to pronounce a judgment. Its not because he knows nothing, its because he knows he doesn't know everything. Maybe, that's the reason they aren't the darlings of the TV media used to quick and vapid sound-bites. Ever noticed how funny news channels look when they invite actors to discuss political issues? Here's the point. They dont invite them because they know everything , they invite them because they appear to know everything. Politicians sure as hell are not exempt from not knowing but blabbering something rather convincingly. I had the opportunity to witness a debate on globalization on TV yesterday on NDTV and was startled to discover some of the participants making juvenile remarks quite confidently. (They are used to it. Most of them were politicians). The public quickly laps up all they say without a hint of skepticism. A good example would be the theory floating around that the lesser the economic regulation, better the nation is economically. On a personal level, I have noticed that the smartest people I meet are the most hesitant and the most annoying pricks act like they are the masters of the universe. (I am definitely not saying, all confident people are dumb. Far from it) 

If the 9/11 bomber wasn't sure he was going to get 17 virgins in heaven, he probably made a very bad career move. What do you think?

Torrent of Tempest

Entombed in the grave of time,
Dormant lies a sea of memories,
Murky, malevolent and undivine,
Deadens my soul with its horrendous chime.

As I recline to relish the forehead caressing breeze,
And savour the all embracing sunshine,
From underneath me I sense the vile toxicant seep,
Draining away all delirium and delight.

My knees go numb with dread,
My throat turns parched at its fiery sight,
As I turn to face my queasy past,
I can, but marvel at its might.
And despair.

What used to creep, now flows.
Who stood upright, now bows.
Amidst the chilling gurgling,
I can sense the numbness in my toes.

As its icy hand,
rips apart my conscience,
My eyes ask the world,
"WIll some help, you lend?"
Now choking, gasping, and buckling,
I stare into the apathetic, cold
eyes of the world.

As my past catches up with me,
Once more I am consigned,
To excruciating torment and agony,
I live a life vapid
But how I wish,
Death should have been mine.