August 16, 2006 (idea)

Back to August 13 2006

In Bombay, English is the first language, even the films and TV shows have sentences in Hindi and then the same sentence in English: 'Ashsmanah kishimar! Sanjeet, Not now, Sanjeet! We kill him later.'
However Sanket’s mother is more confident writing things down so we both carry paper to avoid misunderstandings.
When I asked the Hindi word for 'thank you' Sanket said 'well it’s difficult to pronounce but it goes: 'Thank-You'.'
English is used by almost everyone. How else could a county with 1600 languages communicate? Everyone who wants to travel outside their village has to learn it.
Everyone is very surprised when I say that I don’t know any other European languages. The average here is three or four.

Today I went out for a scooter ride, the roads are quiet in the country, but they are in terrible condition after the rain. The countryside is beautiful in the monsoon season. The fields are green and the lakes are full. In the summer season the same lakes are used as cricket pitches.
Everyone I passed stared at me. This isn’t rude in Indian culture at all. In the children I can understand it, I might be the first white guy they have ever seen however in the adults it is just unnerving. My guide for the day, Deepti, Sanket's younger sister, shouted over the noise of the engine that everyone looks as though they had seen a ghost.
On the return journey I had an idea. I started pulling funny faces as we whizzed past. When Deepti realised what I was doing she started laughing so hard that we ran off the road and crashed.
If you are white in Jalgaon everyone wants to meet you. Sanket says that this is typical of the misdirected curiosity of Indians. The implication being that if they were this interested in mathematics, science or disease prevention then there wouldn't be so many problems in India.
What usually happens is that six or so people arrive from one family or an English class come in and say 'Hello, how are you?' I say, 'I am fine, how are you?' and then they sit there and watch me try to start a conversation.

An exception to this is one of Mr Chowkidar's friend's who talked to me about politics on the eve of Indian Independence Day. (Good pub quiz question: When do most people celebrate Independence Day? Answer: 15th of August)
We talked about many subjects and I was comfortable with all of them, he cleverly prevented himself from revealing any of his own opinions, but when the subject switched to Lebanon and Israel I found that he and others in the room covertly supported Israel. It has been said that 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend' (Sun Tzu or Machiavelli? (As it turns out it's an arabian proverb.)) It occurred to me that India and Israel both consider themselves stuck on the edge of an Islamic empire.
I explained my viewpoint which is that the Zionists were rude as they arrived in Palestine, in the manner akin to breaking in to someone's house, trampling mud over the floor, eating the food and water and going to sleep on the bed. Not the big one, or the little one, but the one that was 'juuuuust right'.
Yes, in my minds eye goldilocks is a Zionist Jew.
(This is a particularly interesting allegory because which version you were read reveals which side you support. The modern version gets you to empathise with the girl and treat her as hungry, childish and innocent. The old fashioned version supports the sanctity of the home and teaches good manners, it shows her as an impostor and she gets eaten by the bears at the end.)

A few days later I was out with some of Sanket's friends and one of them engaged me in an argument about the virtues of marriage. I asked him if he was married and he said no. I went on to outline the reasons why I thought that a man has no need for marriage. I was just about to complete the tort when I found out that he was getting married in two weeks time! I apologised and said that on a point of principle that I do not argue against another’s happiness.
Thus began the meta-argument
He said that the purpose of an argument was to win. I said that if any argument causes harm it is immoral and the purpose of an argument is at least to inform, at the most to persuade, and at its best to find compromise.
Inevitably this lead to a discussion about war.
He asked why India had the largest navy in the world (they don't)if it wasn’t to win? I explained that after the invention of the Mach 3 Cruise Missile, ships were no longer weapons, but merely targets.
Looks like I lost the meta-argument!
Don't argue against Indian patriotism, even if it is to inform.

forward to August 17, 2006