Should students (be permitted to) involve in politics - 3

The real concern of those who oppose

If we dig deep, it is clear that the current spate of advises to students and admonishment of student involvement in politics, stems from

a) a sense that the investments in educating such students is not yielding labor for the market. Clearly folks are disappointed.
b) a fear of being questioned. Seldom does anyone like being questioned. 

c) more importantly, the fear and hatred for the left - the Commies and Maoists as they are now referred to. I wonder if many who liberally use these words even know what their philosophies are , or how Marxism is different from Maoism. Most just assume that the former group shouts slogans and organizes strikes, while the latter does not hesitate to use the gun. Without getting into the merits or demerits of the left wing philosophy, we know, that there is little left in the left today. To my mind, they haven't evolved a philosophy for India and will remain a fringe force, unless they are beaten up and made big. 

Students and politics
There are actually no valid reasons to justify an advisory to students on politics. Students beyond 18 are majors. It is for them to decide what they want to do. They are thinking individuals , for whom we may have certain responsibilities, but certainly not rights. They have their dreams and responsibilities. We can equip them with knowledge and skill to choose. But the choice is theirs. 

In fact it is important that students are aware of the world around them - including the political world. It affects them now and will affect them in future as well. They are the future and they will naturally be and have to be concerned about what is being done now - as it will decide what will be done later. Whether some one chooses to take a right wing stance or centerist stance or a left wing stance is her / his choice. 

There are just 7 things that we could do, and they are

1. Inculcate a value system which makes morality and personal integrity as non-negotiable values.

2. Inculcate sensitivity to the people in the world around 

3. Inculcate a sense of respect ( not 'tolerance') for plurality of culture, thought and action. 

4. Inculcate a spirit of questioning - irreverential questioning. 

5. Inculcate courage to take a stance and to call a spade a spade. 

6. Provide all information available so that he / she makes a well thought out, deliberated and educated stance. 

7.And pray to the Almighty, 

Cry as hoarse as we may - students will do what they please. Let them. Let a thousand ideas come forth. Let the ideas clash and evolve. Only then will we have a better tomorrow. 

Should students (be permitted to) involve in politics : 2

Examining the arguments against students involving in politics

1. Politics will spoil students - it will destroy them, make them corrupt
The basic assumption behind the statement that politics will spoil students, is that politics per se is bad. This is an assumption that is on extremely weak grounds. There are certainly bad, corrupt, scheming politicians around. But well, there are bad, corrupt and scheming corporations around too. There are those which plunder national wealth (recall the acute drinking water problem that Cocacola cause in Plachimada, those that cause irreparable damage to the environment (recall Union Carbide, HUL's dumping of mercury in Kodaikanal), bad corporations which sell products that cause harm to people (there are several examples to recall) , bad corporations which evade taxes ( again several examples to recall) , bad banks that mis-sell products to unwitting customers (recall that the regulator has recently intervened in this regard) bad banks that are involved in routing black money out of the country etc (recall the inquiries initiated on some of the foreign and public sector banks). Would we tell students not to work in and for Corporations ? Or are we going to send students to become sadhus in the Himalayas, so that they may remain pure, un-spoilt and un-corrupt.

I don't think the issue is with politics. It is about how students have been brought up as individuals. If they had been brought up as responsible individuals, who would seek and understand issues before forming opinions on them, if they are brought up as individuals who can introspect deeply and argue using facts instead of loud voice and violence and if they can disagree - yet live in peace, if they are brought up with a value system with integrity - nothing will affect them or spoil them. Else, it does not require a stint in politics to ruin them.

2. We subsidize the education with our taxes - not their politics. So they better behave.

The typical 'I have thrown you bones. Wag your tail and don't bark' argument.  Expecting students to be restrained and sticking on the four walls, buried into books, unquestioning and compliant, just because their education is subsidized, comes from a feudal mindset. Repulsive. Students are not slaves. They don't sell their souls to us for funding their education.  Also, what and for how long a student wants to study is his choice. The strata of the society she/ he chooses to serve and how she / he chooses to do so is entirely her / his choice.

And it not that we are pouring money into education. The total budgetary allocation for the entire education sector is about Rs 72 thousand Crores, of the total budgetary expenses of Rs 19.48 lakh crores and that is less than 1% of the GDP. A very poor allocation compared to global standards. Pittance. Compare this with the amount of direct and indirect subsidies that the government gives for corporations by way of incentives, concessions and by way of massive write offs of loans given to corporations - all these attempts to privatize profits and socialize losses. In fact, since these numbers are larger, why don't we look at chopping off the large value items first, before we look at these low value items.

And the tone of such posits is interesting. 'Our tax', 'My tax' they said. Well, if I had a right to decide where my taxes are to be spent, I would want not a penny to be spent on all the subsidies and incentives to corporations. Their contribution by way of employment generation or development is incidental to their process of increasing wealth to their shareholders. After all, organizations should survive and flourish on merit - not on subsidies and incentives. Only then will they be sustainable.

Also, I would also not want monies spent on 182 feet tall statues of iron or 200 feet tall flag masts - for, I think reality is more important than symbolism. (The national flag certainly does not lose its splendor if it is flown in on a shorter mast). I don't have that right to decide on any of these, so do people who now comment on spending on education.

On education, my view is this. Public education and healthcare are investments that the society makes on its citizens and ideally they should be offered free all through. There is a compelling economic rationale for this.We could do well to pick lessons from some of the European and Scandinavian countries like Sweden, Norway, Denmark in this regard. This is however besides the point. 

3. They are in colleges to study - not to participate in politics. If they want let them quit studying and involve in politics. 
Students are in colleges to learn - not just to study. Learning is a wholesome process. And society and polity are very much a part of the environment that students should learn about and deliberate. We live in a country where someone aged 18 can vote. And when we have given her / him this right, on what basis can we say that he should not participate in politics ? And how do we assume that a student who is active in politics is not studying and is not doing well in his academics as well ? 

And this advise to students, asking them to quit studying and involving in politics. Absolutely brilliant. I don't know if the folks who go about making such statements know that there are over 32 lakh students enrolled as members in ABVP. Try telling them this.

I cannot resist quoting the Hon'ble Union Minister for Urban development Mr Venkaiah Naidu who recently advised that 'Kanhaiya Kumar should focus on studies and not get involved in politics'. If only Mr Naidu and his ilk like Mr Arun Jaitley or Mr Gadkari, had followed what they preach now, we would have been saved of their presence in the Government. Mr Naidu conveniently forgot that he started his political career as a leader of the ABVP in 1973-74, after being elected as President of the Students Union of Andhra University Colleges. Mr Jaitley was an ABVP leader who then became the President of the Student's Union of Delhi University in 1974 and later the All India Secretary of the ABVP. Mr Gadkari worked for the ABVP as a student.

If Mr Naidu and his parivar are really serious about students focusing on their studies and not wasting time in politics, they should have disbanded the right wing aligned , largest students union , the ABVP by now and called for other associations to be disbanded. They wouldn't do that.

The real issue hence not about students joining politics - it is about joining 'Left' politics. If it is ABVP, there would have been no issue at all.

4. If they involve in politics, they ruin the hopes that their parents and society have on them

Oh what a genuine sounding concern ! But look deep, you will see that it is not the welfare of students that is the concern here.

Look at the courses offered by most of the Universities - and you will find most of them labelled 'Job oriented' courses. From institutions where ideas are born, nourished, debated and refined, Universities are increasingly becoming training yards for mercenaries for corporate warfare, where students are expected to focus on careers instead of learning and thinking. And the call to privatize education is just for the same reason.

We will need to remember that there is more to life than just earning a living.

Should students (be permitted to) involve in politics : 1

I heard it when I was a student and I hear it again now. 'Should students be involved in politics?'
Thanks to JNU, this question has come up again. The only difference these days the version sounds more like 'Should students be permitted to be involved in politics' 

Caveats

Before I proceed on discussing the issue, let me qualify three things 

1. When I mean a student, I refer to someone, who has touched 18 years of age, for, at 18 they become eligible to vote. 

2. And when I say involve, I do not mean involvement in anti-national activities. 

3. And when I say involve, I also do not mean involving at the cost of their academic pursuits.

And on JNU. Apart from my view that that the entire episode is an attempt to divert public attention from more pressing issues on the economic front, I know very little of what actually happened in JNU. Nevertheless, it is tough to skirt the issue while discussing  about students and politics.

We are told that in JNU
a. Students were involved in seditious activities
b. Students worshiped Mahishasur
c. Students demanded serving beef. 

My view on these three issues are
a. I certainly condemn any anti-national stance. But, whether something seditious actually happened is for the courts to decide. I do not want to jump into conclusions based on doctored videos or data on number of used condoms and chips packets. 

There is no one way to define Nationalism. Nationalism to me is about people - not just land and boundaries. Land and borders are means - not the end of nationalism. Also, there is a sea of difference between being anti-national and being against the policies of the Government of the day - even if they are elected by a massive and brutal majority. Governments and those whose who hold the levers of the government are not Gods and are not above criticism. The legal position is that even judgments of the highest court can be criticized. The verdict of the courts cannot be disobeyed. Judges cannot be criticized. Motives behind the judgement cannot be questioned, but yes - Judgments can be criticized. And it is constitutional right of every citizen to question, criticize, chide, protest and demonstrate (loudly if needed, but non-violently) against actions of the Government that are perceived to be against the interest of the citizen. But, what actually happened in JNU and whether what happened was seditious are facts that we will know only over the course of time. 

b. As a practicing Hindu ( a phrase that I learnt from the Hon'ble HRD Minister) , I am perfectly okay with anyone wanting to worship Mahishasur or Mahabali or even Ravana - or remaining an atheist. The Asur communities revere Mahishasur and consider the Durga puja as a period of mourning. Mahabali is celebrated in Kerala. Ravana is worshipped by a brahmin sub-sect in Madhya Pradesh. Infact, while I would condemn Ravana for usurping Sita. I would in the same breath condemn Rama for a) suspecting the fidelity of his wife b) ditching his pregnant wife just because someone in his kingdom suspected her. I enjoy reading Ravanakaviyam as much as I enjoy Kambaramayanam. That does not make me a lesser 'Hindu' than anyone. And even if it does, one does not care.

Religion is a personal choice and the relationship between an Individual and the Supreme being an unique and personal one. Anyone who had taken an effort to read and understand the Upanishads would understand that this religion is wide and open for people to question, deliberate, discuss , disagree and ponder over. The strength of the 'Hindu' religion is its plurality - something that Abrahamic religions do not have. We have to cherish this plurality. In fact, it is an important duty to free the religion from these half baked belligerent, bigots of the parivar who in the name of protecting it , bring in so much of disrepute. 

c. I strongly support vegetarianism and would want all animals - including cows to be protected. But I know that food is a personal choice.  When, as a nation, we have no qualms about exporting beef, we should no qualms serving it to people who choose it.

So, apart from the fact that the second and third accusations actually sound amusing to me, there is nothing more on the JNU episode. 

Now, coming back to the question - should students be involved in politics, there are broadly four arguments that are advanced by people who oppose student involvement in politics.

1. Politics will spoil students - it will destroy them, make them corrupt. Sly politicians will use them for furthering their causes. 

2. We subsidize the education with our taxes - not their politics. So they better behave.
3. They are in colleges to study - not to participate in politics

4. If they involve in politics, they ruin the hopes that their parents and society have on them.

We will look at each of these in some detail in the next post.

Wow !!! Congress faces funding crisis ...

As I opened the morning papers ...I was delighted to see Business Line reporting that ' With big business tap shut, Cong faces funds crisis'. What a wonderful news !

Nobody pays you when you can't work for them anymore - and certainly not business men. Donations to political parties are investments ...or protection money or both. So, it is natural that the Congress will find no money from big business ...who clearly see that this party will be unproductive for atleast the next five years. But businesses keep on investing ...and logically now, money is flowing somewhere else.

But, think a little more and we immediately realize that if only the congress party had relied on people directly for funds, it would be unlikely that they would be facing such a crisis....small granular contributions don't dry up easily . We are told that the Kerala unit of the party does it....and the Congress has a strong presence and now weild power in the state. But, if they had indeed done it across the country , the Congress would have worked hard to ensure that they serve the people - who would have been their paymasters. In part that explains why politicians in Kerala are -at least outwardly - humble and accessible .

When big business is your paymaster , you do what they bid you to do....but you can throw your weight around and ride fortuners and boleros. You sell the idea that big business and big investments naturally mean development and welfare. To aid you in this proces is the big media (also owned by big business ). And , when it is election time, when it is big money that is supporting you, you can buy votes.

Coming back, we realize and it is obvious there is big business money that has now flown into the saffron party ....and hence it is natural that we will see pro-big business policy action by the government...and naturally all these need not be pro people. One of the first evidences of this is the Land grabbing ordinance...and other such ordinances. Unless the saffron party actually broad bases itself and approaches people directly, we can only see policy for big business and preachings for the people....broad basing will require a humongous effort and change in mindset - which is unlikely.

Over time, I don't expect the saffron party to be any different from the hand that passed on the baton of governance to it, for, as they say ,  எல்லாம் ஒரே குட்டையில் ஊறிய மட்டைகள் (they are all from the same marsh).

Interestingly, this probably explains why the AAP , which has not raised money from big business yet (that two crores is small change when compared to donations for other parties and even they don't seem to be from any big corporate house), is labelled as left of center, the emerging left, extreme left and what not.

Parties know that big money is hot money and as long as they pursue policies that favors big business, and also sell it people as reform and development, they will be able to swim in it. When polices don't come forth or when people don't buy the story ...the model collapses. We are delightfully seeing it happen to the Congress and I hope it happens to the saffron party as well. I hope that this model collapses so many times that parties dump it once and for all. Only then will we have true democracy ...until then we will have to suffer this kleptocracy.

அரங்கத்தில் அம்மா Money திட்டம் !

அழகிரி அங்கென்னா
அரங்கத்தில் அம்மாங்க - நம்மள
அம்மாவும் அய்யாவும்
மாறி மாறி ஆண்டாலும்
கட்சி கொடி கலருலதான்
வித்தியாசம்  இருக்குங்கோ !
கொள்கையெல்லாம் ஒண்ணுங்கோ..
அது ...
"ஆம்புட்ட வரை அள்ளுங்கோ" ...
கணக்கில்லாம அள்ளுனத
கணக்கு பாத்து தாராங்க
ஆளுக்கீராயிரம்
ஆளரவுங்க தாராங்க
ஆளாத கட்சியாரும்
ஐந்நூறு தாரங்க !!
கருக்கலில வாரங்க
கதவைத்  தட்டி தாராங்க !

ஆமா !

யாருங்கடா சொன்னது
PDS சொதப்பலுன்னு ....
இரண்டு பேர அனுப்புங்க
இங்க வந்து பாக்கட்டும் - எம்மா
கச்சிதமா நடக்குது இங்க
அம்மா money திட்டமுன்னு ...

ஆஹா !

எந்த மடையன் சொன்னது
சனநாயகம் நடக்குதுன்னு ?
வந்து இங்க பாக்கட்டும்
நல்லாவே வெளங்கிடும்
ஊரல  செழிப்பா  நடக்கறது
பணநாயக ஆட்சியின்னு ..

AAP win : Hard work, aided and abetted in no small measure by the BJP

Call them naxals, anarchists , the mango people or the zamanaat zapt party or call their leader muffler man or a quitter or whatever, the fact - and yes , it is real hard for a lot of people to swallow is that the man and his rag tag team has won 67 constituencies i.e, 95% of the seats with 54 % popular vote . Now Delhiites are portrayed as nuts, people who don't understand basics, how the national capital is populated by people who want freebies etc and some have even told that they are anti-national !!! Whatever ...a lot of people think that Delhiites usually exhibit a level of confidence that borders on arrogance - and yes they have given the AAP a confident 'Yes' and the BJP an arrogant 'No'.

AAP :......This party quit running the state - or a glorified municipality as some call it -  in 49 days ( although it was on principle), much to the irritation and anger of people who voted it in. People naturally felt cheated. It looked like these fellows are capable of only dharnas - and not of governance. They were reduced to rubble in the parliamentary election and ended up looking like jokers contesting in 400 seats and losing deposit monies in over 90 of them . And though they managed to actually increase their vote share marginally and sent 4 people to the parliament, a lot of us wrote them off. At least I did.

Kejriwal was a butt of jokes...and AAP were labled as AAP tards...its sympathizers labelled as anti nationalists - the logic for which was simple. You wont want to do anything with a scam ridden Congress - and so you have to be with the only alternative the BJP- and being with BJP was being nationalistic and if you are against it, you are anti-national. The media had shifted its focus off to more interesting things ...Modi and the BJP.  And in what seemed as perfect master stroke, Modi pulled Gandhi from the Congress and the broom from AAP and launched the Swacch Bharat Mission. ... For most of us it looked that the AAP was a failed experiment for others it was thankfully a failed experiment. From there to bounce back with such a massive majority ...it no mean act.

To my mind this is a combination of AAP's own effort and the huge effort put in by BJP.

I am personally pleasantly surprised by the way Kejriwal made a comeback. If you had faced failure, you will know that failure can be very painful..and a massive failure combined with huge amount of ridicule can kill people - or their morale. Pulling up from that level must have been really really tough. And going around asking forgiveness and seeking another chance is not something is easy. And motivating and keeping together a bunch of people who came together kicked by an idea to form a fledgling party that  subsequently faced a rout - would have been a stupendous task.

These guys actually went about doing that...they reached out to people, connected with them in a way that no politician has done in the recent past. The volunteer force which was basically a group of rag-tag , disorganized group was slowly built into a structure... This connect with people helped the party to clearly identify priorities, think of solutions and come up with a clear action program as a manifesto. From a party that was identified with a middle-class that was disenchanted with corruption and obsessed with a Jan Lokpal etc ..they moved wider and deeper, linking up with the urban poor - without upsetting the middle class. Their manifesto is well thought out and actionable. They spoke of development with equity in the Mohalla meetings... So what helped the AAP was

1. Kejriwal going out and saying sorry for quitting and seeking another chance
2. The paanch saal Kejriwal slogan ...that was an assurance that they will not quit this time
3. A better organized structure 
4. A longer preparation time (in part granted to them by the BJP)
5. An ability to connect with people across various classes
6. The memory of the 49 days rule when power tariff was lower , water was free and petty corruption disappeared ...Yes this did seem to have mattered ...if at all , this was the only proof of concept that the AAP could talk of. 
7. A clean, and man- next door image. 

But then, the BJP contributed to the victory in no small measure.

1. They stretched the time for election to over 8 months ...giving valuable time for the AAP to reorganize and rework. It was plain stupid to do that. 
2. The 4 M strategy - Modi, Money , Mud and Majoritism just did not work. Modi was not able to connect with the people. The 'Move ahead with Modi' story is no longer exciting enough. The massive contingent of MPs and Ministers campaigning - just showed that the party was getting jittery. The mudslinging and mid night hawala etc failed again as it backfired terribly. It only made Kejriwal stronger... people clearly saw that this as a smear campaign. And I guess nobody was bothered about Majoritism. 
3. Lack of clarity and then a wrong CM candidate . First they ran 'Vote for Modi sarkar campaign' - with Modi as the face and when the first rally failed, they removed Harsha Vardan who was the familiar face and imposed Kiran Bedi... Bedi was a terrible mistake. She managed to rub both the voters and the party folks on the wrong side. She was seen as a turncoat ( and she indeed is. Till yesterday she was saying that she was a responsible person ....blah blah and today, she quickly said that it as she has given her 100% , the party will need to introspect for the defeat)
4. And there was over exposure of Modi , on photos, in posters,  in news papers , over the radio ....just all over ..it was just Modi Modi Modi..... Modi appeared to be almost narcissistic - with name-stripped coats and all that. The party is just refusing to grow up.
5. An all talk and no concrete delivery track record for the last 8 odd months - for the people who mattered. For the man on the street, it was all vague announcements and pronouncements ...nothing else.
6. An aggressive pro-big corporate image that the BJP created - with the Land Grabbing ordinance ...sorry Land Acquisition ordinance , changes to labour laws etc... Well that clearly showed that growth trajectory that BJP was taking was not inclusive. 
7. The BJP did not paint itself in glory with all the ghar wapsi dramas that the sangh parivar enacted ....and psychotic blabber from some the parties MPs....it clearly alienated the minorities...and moderates . And with the Congress giving up even before the election, they moved to the AAP. ...(and AAP did the smart thing of rejecting the Imam's support - else it would have given the BJP a chance to play the majoritism card).
8. And finally, nobody wants a lecture on culture, lifestyle and dressing, on the number of children you have and where to send thrm to etc ...least of all a Delhiite ....and the BJP MPs..not just the Sangh and its gang went about just doing that ...playing moral police. 

When Modi addressed the rally in Delhi, he said 'Jo Desh ka mood hai - wahi Dilli ka mood hai'... In time, the converse will also be true.. Wonder if the party will introspect ( as Bedi wanted it to do) and rework its strategy.

The ordeal of attending wedding receptions

If attending wedding ceremonies is futile - attending wedding receptions is an ordeal - actually a series.

The first problem is finding a gift. I never realized that finding a gift is a problem , till some years back - when my friend confided that he normally re-packed and re-'presented' gifts that he received...."What do you do with 17 wall clocks, 8 pairs of watches , a dozen Milton Casserole hot packs and a half a dozen flower vases?" - he asked. Ever since he made this startling 'disclosure' - it has been my challenge to find a gift that does not get re-packed and re-presented. For a while thereafter, I thought I got over this problem by getting gift vouchers or gift cards...till another friend to whom I had gifted a gift-card for his wedding called me about a year later to say that the card's validity period had expired and wanted know how the validity period could be extended !!!. I then decided to ask the 'inviter' what they wanted . Some have been helpful...but not all. So....the problem still remains...

If after some mental wrestling and walking up and down several stores, you finally manage to find a gift that wont get re-'presented' (that is , if you are really concerned about it) and go to the wedding reception, you encounter the next problem. - actually a question and that is when to reach ?. If you reach early - you have a problem and if you go late - you have a problem.

It took more than a couple of instances for me to realize that punctuality is not a virtue when  it comes to attending receptions. Whenever I had gone to the reception hall on time - I would realize that I was usually the only soul there...people would start trickling in quite some time later. And whenever I checked, I was told that the bride and the groom had gone to the parlour !!?!  Men going to parlours sounded obnoxious and unmanly to me - for,  those were the days when there were no 'Naturals' or 'Green trends' and the term metrosexuality was not yet in vogue (people are now saying  that metrosexuality is giving way for 'spornosexuality'...whatever that means) ... After a while, the couple would walk in - both made-up in the parlour beyond recognition...with the girl usually more un-recognizable of the two. The groom would have his hair looking wet, with a coat of powder on his face and the girl would have her hair (I guess it is mostly wigs) done up with plastic pearls pinned up here and there, hair and wig , all swirled around. The greatest damage would be to the face - with all colours ( matching with her saree) applied above and below her eyes, a garish lip stick, several coats of paint ... oh ! ...terrible. !!. Further, ever since the days of Hum Aapke Hain Koun - or about that time, it is become a norm that grooms in Tamil Nadu should wear richly brocaded sherwanis for wedding receptions and the bride should wear a gaghra choli or a glass and stone embroided saree - even if the reception is in Omalur or Puthanampatti....(call it cultural penetration if you want to) ...I have always wondered if they ever got to wear the sherwani another time.... Anyway - the point is - if you go early - you will have to wait.

And if you go a bit late, apart from the trouble of having to find a parking slot for your car, you will still have to to wait . You will have stand in a queue and wait to pass on the gift. A long winding queue it is. Waiting for the queue to subside is no panacea ...the queue only gets longer. After so many years of attending wedding receptions, I must admit that I haven't yet found out the exact time to enter the reception hall.

In the meanwhile if in the hall, you see some folks you know, you soon realize that you have to be an expert in sign language to be able to communicate with them. Reception halls these days are usually awfully noisy. Forget classical cutcheries - even soft and pleasing music has become a rarity . These days, it is a deadly cacophony of heavy noise - voice and instrument that masquerades as music. People who arrange for the reception usually make it a point to get some super-singer drop outs and the like to come , belt out some recent and no so recent movie numbers - of all kinds - yes - of all kinds - and tear your ear drums. You just can't shout beyond their 'notes' - and so communication within the community in the hall is purely non-verbal....You keep hearing that dun dun dun dun ..and some off-notes ...and soon, all that you hear is a 'koooooiiiinnnnnnn' sound in your ear.

You realize it is time and join the queue. When you finally manage to reach the dais and wait for your turn , over all the din in the place, you slowly start hearing things (probably your system has got used to the noise) ...interesting conversations that are spoken in loud voices. And they are usually of the following kinds : A man in late forties would usually asks the girl ...'Hi , Do you recognize me ?' - and the girl would quickly do some thinking and says ' Yes of course - I do Mama', and the gentleman would quickly correct her ' I am not your Mama - I am your Chittappa'.....( as if it mattered to the girl :) !... . And a little later, a Mami in early sixties would come, squeeze the grooms chin - and much to his discomfiture,  tell the girl ...'this boy was very mischievous as a kid' and would go on recounting some terrible goof up by the poor fellow. After all these people move, you get your turn . You say a big congratulations to the groom - while  he takes a lot of effort and introduces you to the girl ( you can be dead sure that she wont remember a bit of it) ...and they insist that they will want a visible proof of attendance - in the form of a photograph. So, you hold your breath, pull in your now-starting-to-show belly , freeze as a statue for the photographer to do the honours and carefully get down ...(thanks to the videographer's glaring light- you cant see anything for a while) ...

And then comes the next problem ...dining. The dining hall is usually overflowing and you wonder if people had come straight to the dining hall before going up to see the couple. While you wait to see if there is some kind of a queue there too, to your horror you see some people standing behind people who are having their food - waiting for them to get up...OMG !. Now you have decide if you can shun shame, stand till somebody gets up , to hop into the seat or if you should drive to some restaurant nearby for your dinner...And if you decide on the former,  in a jiffy you see a large plantain leaf spread out with some 23 items served on it ( I counted it once)...the mere sight of which fills your stomach...But if you have the fortitude to taste all that stuff , and by chance if you really want a second helping it is really tough ..the Uncle and Aunt who sat next to you would have already left and the hungry ones would have already started to occupy their seats...So , you wind up - wondering if you had a proper meal or not , walk out, pick up a beeda and move out.

இப்படி ஒரு திருமணவரவேற்பு  நிகழ்ச்சிக்கு போகலேன்ன என்ன ?  ...மக்களே !, don't take invitations for wedding receptions too seriously. If you care for the couple, call them up a few days later and convey your wishes. And if they are really your real near and real dear - call them over for lunch or dinner at home - or if you are confident of the quality of cooking at home , you may call them to a good restaurant...You can be sure that you are seeing the couple, your eyes and ears remain undamaged and they will also be a normal and relaxed.