जीवन चलचित्र नहीं; प्रेमचंद का उपन्यास है!

>> 10.02.2009


दो साल से मन में इच्छा थी की प्रेमचंद की गोदान पढूं | किताब किसीने दी भी | लेकिन २०-२५ पन्नों से आगे न बढ़ पाया | एक हफ्ते पहले  वैष्णोदेवी जाते हुए वही किताब  फिर से खरीदी - और इस बार पढ़ी | बहुत सुना  था गोदान के बारे में  "हिंदी साहित्य की एक महान रचना"| पढ़कर पता चला ऐसा क्यों कहते हैं |


प्रेमचंद जी ने भारत के गाँव का जो हाल बताया है उस्के बारे में हम में से कईयों ने पढ़ा और सुना होगा | परन्तु अगर उस हालात के दर्द और बेबसी का बयान अगर किसी ने इस तरह बताया हो जिससे हम जैसे भी उस वेदना को महसूस कर सकें तो वह प्रेमचंद ही हैं | व्यक्ति की मनः स्तिथि और मनो दशा का वर्णन जैसे उन्होंने किया है उसे देख के  लगता है ऐसा कुछ अपने साथ भी घटा है |


गोदान कहानी है होरी की | एक ऐसा किसान जिसने जीवन में कभी भी सुख न देखा | हमेशा सुख की एक मृगतृष्णा थी जिसका पीछा करते उसने जीवन बिताया और अंत में प्राण भी त्यागे |
विभिन्न प्रसंगों की मदद लेके प्रेमचंद धन संचै को जीवन का परमार्थ बनाने वालों की मूर्खता दिखाते हैं | बहुत सालों बाद मैंने हिंदी में कोई उपन्यास या किताब पढ़ी है | और इस उपन्यास ने मुझे हिंदी में पढने का एक बड़ा मज़बूत कारन दिया है |


अगर आपने गोदान पढ़ी है तो अपनी प्रतिक्रिया दीजिये | अगर नहीं पढ़ी है तो ज़रूर पढिये |
आखरी पन्ना पढ़के तो आँखों में आँसू आना निश्चित है |

Read more...

demystifying the new social development approach in the current scenario

>> 9.19.2009

A lot many discussions that I have with people who do not share the same positive feelings about the social sector end up with examples like "Well, I have seen people drawing hefty salaries even in NGOs" or "How do you explain the glamorous events that these NGOs conduct".

I feel questions like these arise from an uninformed and biased perception of the social sector. Plus when it comes to talking about perceptions, especially in a country like ours, well you have multitudes of them. I will try and give my 2 cents here - on why we should not look at the social sector like a holy cow and put it on a pedestal so high that it is not able to serve the very purpose for which it exists.

"Serving the poor and needy" has been a recurring theme of goodness since times immemorial and gained prominence during the freedom struggle. Once we gained independence and Jawaharlal Nehru took over as the Prime Minister, the focus was on uplifting the masses. Please note that I am saying the focus was on uplifting the masses - where the efforts have lead us to is a totally difference topic. This continued with "Jai Jawan, Jai Kisan" (maybe because the concept of urban poverty had not yet set in) and "Garibi Hatao".

Now, let us realize that there was always a Upper Class, Middle Class and Poor Class. The sizes of these classes have varied over last 60 odd years - in relative as well as absolute terms. Upper Class was the Industrialists and IAS officers (and the likes). Middle class was composed of the rest of the government machinery and a small number employed by the private sector. Then you had the poor. Until as recently as 10-15 years, people associated with the poor's cause could only be wearing kurta-pyjamas and sarees. They were expected to relinquish most of the material comforts because "how else can you serve the poor better without being poor yourself". This was also the time where under the garb of doing good, many NGOs and individuals, ground their own axes.

To summarise, this period of social work/development was driven by compassion (actual or superficial), pity (which prevented us from being objective and from noticing stark truths), and the need to do good at any cost - even at the cost of the beneficiary :-). Like mother's love which is oblivious to a child's shortcomings, social workers were not ready to accept the fact that sometimes hard decisions need to be taken.

i. Finances were mostly in the form of donations. This made the social workers more answerable to the donors and less answerable or unanswerable to the target audience.

ii. Social work was taken up always as a passion and rarely as a career. This again, sometimes, clouded the judgement of social workers.

iii. Any kind of overhead costs were seen as a waste of expenditure - this did not necessarily translate into lean organizations. It rather meant less achievements.

What is happening now? With average age of the upper middle class dropping down and the absolute size of this class increasing, we have young people who are able to divert their thoughts towards social issues and think objectively about them. The new approach is characterised by the following changes.

i. An enterprise-based approach as opposed to a charity-based approach makes more sense now.

ii. It makes sense to make the target group stakeholders in the effort. This way they are not only accountable they have the right to demand too.

iii. It is also about inducing a sense of self-esteem in both the target audience and the people working in this field.

And in this approach, false appearances of the old kind are not considered that important. Now we need to don business-suits to get funding instead of courting industrialists for that once-a-year cheque. In this objective approach, people are not looking at forsaking the good part of life. They say "While living my own life, I can help other people live theirs. It is not my appearance that is important, but my ideas."

And that is why getting paid highly is not a reason good enough to suspect a person working in the social enterprise of double standards and hypocrisy.

Read more...

TEDIndia 2009 Fellows announced

>> 9.16.2009

TED announced its list of fellows for 2009 on its website. Not all the 103 fellow are Indians (neither did I wish for anything of that sorts) but the list is refreshing. It features 103 diverse people who have been doing something really different.

The list also reiterates a simple tenet - "More often than not, it is not the lack of time or resources that prevents us from doing something, it is the lack of motivation". And that is precisely why we hear of life changing experiences which change the way we prioritize.

That is all for now, but make sure you check out the list and read up on each person on their net.

Read more...

Where in the world is Rajdeep Sardesai?

>> 5.30.2009

Of late. people I know speak with a lot of hatred and venom when they talk about the celebrity news anchors (I am not sure journalist is the right word). I do not watch much of TV news but of whatever I do, I feel the TV news channels are waiting for the next "big news". They do not realise that as we speak, every minute an important piece of news is happening across the country.


I find their coverage of important issues leave much to be desired. By important issues I do not mean only events that happen in Delhi and Mumbai or the other big cities of India. India as a country is not yet fully shining - where is the picture of that non-shiny part? Why does there have to be a Bollywood angle to a breaking news?

We give minute to minute updates on what is happening in Karunanidhi's house/office during the negotiations for seats - who is going in, who is going out? Believe me as these things happen, the unstoppable wheels of my country are turning and with every turn they are churning out stories worth knowing - stories that need to be aired.

Why are all these channels depending on sensatinalism and hiding behind the garb of "Public wants it". Well, quite possible. Who is going to change the public's taste?

Not Rajdeep Sardesai, Barkha Dutt or Sagarika Ghose. Which TV channel covered the atrocities in Chattisgarh reported in Tehelka ? In my next post I will try and analyze a point of view that many people have put forward "Media is another industry out there to make a profit. Why single them out for dereliction of duty - if there is a duty at all"?

Read more...

Are we talking in air?

>> 5.24.2009

Jisko hindi mein bolte hain "Hawa mein baatein karna". I am strong advocate of the view that every social "kind-of" work one does should directly or indirectly make an impact on society. One cannot be talking in air about bringing about a change in society.


I am part of a team that is organizing a workshop on "Empowering the Underprivileged through Innovations". It is to be held on 24th May 2009 but this post is about something else. My friend's comment on the value of a workshop like this set my mind thinking. I did give him an impassioned and spontaneous response - maybe the response sufficed for the moment but I think I need to think about this. Are my actitivities, or to make it more generic and relevant, are our activities making a difference on the ground?

Are we just patting ourselves on the back and discussing sweet nothings in guise of conducting workshops and seminars and talks. Well, could be. Am not sure. And the fact that I am not sure is not a good thing. We should be doing our due diligence before plunging into any activity which "we think" we are doing for the society. Here are some questions I intend to ask myself and my partners next time I am involved in any activity.

i. Who are the beneficiaries? If the activity intends to benefit a particular section of society how do I intend to measure the extent of impact.
ii. How are you going to use the earnings, if any?
iii. Whom are you partnering with? Do your partners share the same view as you?
iv. How does your activity intend to maintain its impact after its tenure?
v. Are you entering a space because there is no other organization serving the need? If no, then are you doing it because your approach is different? Did you try to partner with any organization before going ahead?

I think these questions are important and really important to ensure you are on the correct path. You say?

Read more...

  © Blogger template Shiny by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP