The winner of an Oscar, a Tony, and an Edgar Allan Poe Award, Sidney Sheldon has over 200 television scripts, twenty-five major motion pictures, six Broadway plays, eighteen novels (which have sold over 300 million copies) and one memoir to his credit, ranking him as one of the world's most prolific writers.
The style of this autobiography is uniquely Sheldon and completely engrossing. As he explained in a 1982 interview : "I try to write my books so the reader can't put them down, I try to construct them so when the reader gets to the end of a chapter, he or she has to read just one more chapter. It's the technique of the old Saturday afternoon serial: leave the guy hanging on the edge of the cliff at the end of the chapter."
The book starts with his impoverished childhood during the Great Depression and surprisingly ends before his meteoric rise as a successful novelist.
Born Sidney Schechtel in Chicago in 1917 to German & Russian parents, Sheldon's life had more ups and downs than a month of roller coaster rides. A long time sufferer from manic depression or bipolar disorder as it is now called, he often turned away at critical moments from paths that were just opening up to him.
Success took time coming his way and even when it did, it didn't stay long. (Not until his writing career took off, then there was no looking back) In his words "Success is an elevator that moves up and down" His ups included having three musical hits playing simultaneously on Broadway, the Oscar and the Screen Writers Guild award for Best Musical for "Annie Get your Gun" The downs included long periods of unemployment and blacklisting by the studios.
There are so many anecdotes about so many famous people that are a pleasure to read. Groucho Marx was an extremely close friend and also Godfather of Sheldon's daughter Mary. Having seen the Hollywood industry as a writer, producer and director his insights are precise and delightful.
My only disappointment was that I wish he had written a part 2 before his death on January 30th, this year. He does throw a few morsels about his writing life experiences, but they just aren't enough for his adoring fans.
I highly recommend the book to all Sheldon fans. This is the first autobiography I have ever read which I did not put down even once.
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Book Review Ice Candy Man
In 2000, one of the few films that moved me to tears was Deepa Mehta's "1947 : Earth" Coming from the South of the Vindhya's, the Partition was something mentioned in passing in text books. We did not know any affected families and hardly anyone down South spoke about this bloody episode in India and Pakistan's shared past.
According to Richard Symonds 1950, The Making of Pakistan, London, ASIN B0000CHMB1, p 74 "at the lowest estimate, half a million people perished and twelve million became homeless"
"1947 : Earth" brought this part of our history to life and I wanted to read the book which spawned the movie. (Everyone knows that books are better than the movies they inspire) This was on my "To Read" list for almost 4 years before I bought the book and it took me another 3 years to read it. Even reading the book itself took over a month, because it induced strong feelings of despondency, depression and immense sorrow.
The problem with history books is that they tend to dehumanize history, apart from the fact that history is interpreted by the writer for his/her own convenience. Bapsi Sidhwa's - Ice Candy Man manages to avoid both these cons. The story is semi fictional but it is also based on her own experience and that of Rana Khan.
The entire story is told through the eyes of Lenny Sethi (Sethna in the movie) from the time she is 7 to early teenage. Lenny is a Parsi girl. Her religion and age does play a pivotal part in the story telling because most of the events around her do not affect her or her immediate family directly, although it affects the lives of everyone else around her. As Ralph Crane puts it "It may be that the atrocities of 1947 are best seen through the innocent naive eyes of a child, who has no Hindu, Muslim or Sikh axe to grind. . . Lenny is free both from the prejudices of religion and from the prejudices against women and the constraints she will be subject to as she grows older."
Lenny's naivety is brought home often, like when she comes to know that her mother and Electric aunt are acquiring petrol and immediately jumps to the conclusion that they are the ones responsible for setting all the fires in Lahore.
Sidhwa's characters are extremely well etched from Ayah, to masseur, to Ice Candy man, to Imam Din to Mucho, to cousin, to Godmother to Hari (later Himmat Ali). All these characters play an important part in Lenny's life. Each of their religions takes centre stage as matters escalate. And the rich detailing of each character makes the reader commiserate with the plight of each of the "victims".
Her imagery is excellent and brings each scene to life. Visualising Rahul Khanna, Nandita Das and Aamir Khan in the roles of Masseur, Ayah and Ice Candy man simply helped the process.
An extremely touching and poignant story. Khushwant Singh (A Partition survivor himself) says this book deserves to be ranked amongst the most authentic and best books on the partition.
I would highly recommend this book to everyone. It would help one start to comprehend at what cost our Independence was achieved and August 14th/15th can no longer be viewed by most as "just another dry day"
Sunday, June 24, 2007
When the US media starts to lose track
ACCORDING TO CNN, AFGHANISTAN IS LOCATED IN SYRIA!
Many in the US have a difficult time differentiating between Arabs and Iranians. President Bush has been caught many times being confused between Iraq and Iran. Some even went as far as suspecting that his poor knowledge of the area was behind the mix-up that led to the involvement of the US in Iraqi quagmire.
Apparently, the leader of the Western world is not alone in this mix-up. Even CNN, the news channel which heralded the 7/24 news broadcast world wide, has a difficult time locating Afghanistan
Here's Anderson Cooper, doing his thing...
And for those of you who aren't quite sure where it is, Afghanistan is located...
... in Syria.
And for those of you who aren't quite sure where it is, Afghanistan is located...
... in Syria.
Afghanistan would be three countries to the east, Just past Iraq and Iran.
I guess there's a point where U.S. foreign policy is such a near-total failure in so many countries, aggravating extremism in the name of fighting it, that even the media starts to lose track of.
I guess there's a point where U.S. foreign policy is such a near-total failure in so many countries, aggravating extremism in the name of fighting it, that even the media starts to lose track of.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Displacing farmers: India Will Have 400 million Agricultural Refugees
http://www.stwr.net/content/view/1999/37
22nd June 07 - Devinder Sharma ~ STWR Contributing Writer
“Special Economic Zone (SEZ) is an idea whose time has come,” the Prime Minister had said at an award ceremony in Mumbai sometimes back. Supported by all political parties, including the Left Front, he has actually officiated a nationwide campaign to displace farmers. Almost 500 special economic zones are being carved out (see The New Maharajas of India). What is however less known is that successive government’s are actually following a policy prescription that had been laid out by the World Bank as early as in 1995.
A former vice-president of the World Bank and a former chairman of Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), a body that governs the 16 international agricultural research centers, Dr Ismail Serageldin, had forewarned a number of years ago. At a conference organised by the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation in Chennai a few years back, he quoted the World Bank to say that the number of people estimated to migrate from rural to urban India by the year 2015 is expected to be equal to twice the combined population of UK, France and Germany.
The combined population of UK, France and Germany is 200 million. The World Bank had therefore estimated that some 400 million people would be willingly or unwillingly moving from the rural to urban centres by 2015. Subsequent studies have shown that massive distress migration will result in the years to come. For instance, 70 per cent of Tamil Nadu, 65 per cent of Punjab, and nearly 55 per cent of Uttar Pradesh is expected to migrate to urban centres by the year 2020.
These 400 million displaced will constitute the new class of migrants – agricultural refugees.
Agricultural reforms that are being introduced in the name of increasing food production and minimising the price risks that the farmers continue to be faced with, are actually aimed at destroying the production capacity of the farm lands and would lead to further marginalisation of the farming communities. Encouraging contract farming, future trading in agriculture commodities, land leasing, forming land-sharing companies, direct procurement of farm commodities by amending the APMC Act will only drive out a majority of farmers out of subsistence agriculture.
Although the land holding size is diminishing, the answer does not lie in allowing the private companies to replace farmers. Somehow the entire effort of the policy makers is to establish that Indian agriculture has become a burden on the nation and the sooner the country offloads the farming class the better it will be for economic growth.
Contract farming therefore has become the new agricultural mantra. Not realising that private companies enter agriculture with the specific objective of garnering more profits from the same piece of land. These companies, if the global experience is any indication, bank upon still more intensive farming practices, drain the soil of nutrients and suck ground water in a couple of years, and render the fertile lands almost barren after four to five years. It has been estimated that the crops that are contracted by the private companies require on an average 20 times more chemical inputs and water than the staple foods.
Sugarcane farmers, for instance, who follow a system of cane bonding with the mills, actually were drawing 240 cm of water every year, which is three times more than what wheat and rice requires on an average. Rose cultivation, introduced a few years back, requires 212 inches of groundwater consumption in every acre. Contract farming will therefore further exploit whatever remains of the ground water resources. These companies would then hand over the barren and unproductive land to the farmers who leased them, and would move to another fertile piece of land. This has been the global experience so far.
Allowing direct procurement of farm commodities, setting up special markets for the private companies to mop up the produce, and to set up land share companies, are all directed at the uncontrolled entry of the multinational corporations in the farm sector. Coupled with the introduction of the genetically modified crops, and the unlimited credit support for the agribusiness companies, the focus is to strengthen the ability of the companies to take over the food chain.
I have always warned that agribusiness companies in reality hate farmers. Nowhere in the world have they worked in tandem with farmers. Even in North America and Europe, agribusiness companies have pushed farmers out of agriculture. As a result, only 7,00,000 farming families are left on the farm in the United States. Despite massive subsidies in European Union, one farmer quits agriculture every minute. Knowing well that the markets will displace farmers, the same agriculture prescription is being applied in India.
A Planning Commission study has shown that 73 per cent of the cultivable land in the country is owned by 23.6 per cent of the population. With more and more farmers being displaced through land acquisitions, either for SEZ or for food processing and technology parks or for real estate purposes, land is further getting accumulated in the hands of the elite and resourceful. With chief ministers acting as property dealers, farmers are being lured to divest control over cultivable land. Food security and food self-sufficiency is no longer the country’s political priority.
22nd June 07 - Devinder Sharma ~ STWR Contributing Writer
It was on the cards. With Prime Minister Manmohan Singh announcing the formation of a new rehabilitation policy for farmers displaced from land acquisitions, it is now official -- farmers have to quit agriculture.
Ever since the Congress-led UPA Coalition assumed power after an angry rural protest vote threw out the erstwhile BJP-led NDA combination in May 2004, the Prime Minister had initiated a plethora of new policies for the spread of industrialization. After having laid the policy framework that allows private control over community resources – water, biodiversity, forests, seeds, agriculture markets, and mineral resources -- the UPA government finally looked at the possibility of divesting the poor people of their only economic security – a meagre piece of land holding.
“Special Economic Zone (SEZ) is an idea whose time has come,” the Prime Minister had said at an award ceremony in Mumbai sometimes back. Supported by all political parties, including the Left Front, he has actually officiated a nationwide campaign to displace farmers. Almost 500 special economic zones are being carved out (see The New Maharajas of India). What is however less known is that successive government’s are actually following a policy prescription that had been laid out by the World Bank as early as in 1995.
A former vice-president of the World Bank and a former chairman of Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), a body that governs the 16 international agricultural research centers, Dr Ismail Serageldin, had forewarned a number of years ago. At a conference organised by the M S Swaminathan Research Foundation in Chennai a few years back, he quoted the World Bank to say that the number of people estimated to migrate from rural to urban India by the year 2015 is expected to be equal to twice the combined population of UK, France and Germany.
The combined population of UK, France and Germany is 200 million. The World Bank had therefore estimated that some 400 million people would be willingly or unwillingly moving from the rural to urban centres by 2015. Subsequent studies have shown that massive distress migration will result in the years to come. For instance, 70 per cent of Tamil Nadu, 65 per cent of Punjab, and nearly 55 per cent of Uttar Pradesh is expected to migrate to urban centres by the year 2020.
These 400 million displaced will constitute the new class of migrants – agricultural refugees.
Acerbating the crisis are the policy initiatives that promotes privatization of natural resources, take over of farm land, integrating Indian agriculture with the global economy, and moving farmers out of agriculture – in essence the hallmark of the neo-liberal economic growth model.
Agricultural reforms that are being introduced in the name of increasing food production and minimising the price risks that the farmers continue to be faced with, are actually aimed at destroying the production capacity of the farm lands and would lead to further marginalisation of the farming communities. Encouraging contract farming, future trading in agriculture commodities, land leasing, forming land-sharing companies, direct procurement of farm commodities by amending the APMC Act will only drive out a majority of farmers out of subsistence agriculture.
Although the land holding size is diminishing, the answer does not lie in allowing the private companies to replace farmers. Somehow the entire effort of the policy makers is to establish that Indian agriculture has become a burden on the nation and the sooner the country offloads the farming class the better it will be for economic growth.
Contract farming therefore has become the new agricultural mantra. Not realising that private companies enter agriculture with the specific objective of garnering more profits from the same piece of land. These companies, if the global experience is any indication, bank upon still more intensive farming practices, drain the soil of nutrients and suck ground water in a couple of years, and render the fertile lands almost barren after four to five years. It has been estimated that the crops that are contracted by the private companies require on an average 20 times more chemical inputs and water than the staple foods.
Sugarcane farmers, for instance, who follow a system of cane bonding with the mills, actually were drawing 240 cm of water every year, which is three times more than what wheat and rice requires on an average. Rose cultivation, introduced a few years back, requires 212 inches of groundwater consumption in every acre. Contract farming will therefore further exploit whatever remains of the ground water resources. These companies would then hand over the barren and unproductive land to the farmers who leased them, and would move to another fertile piece of land. This has been the global experience so far.
Allowing direct procurement of farm commodities, setting up special markets for the private companies to mop up the produce, and to set up land share companies, are all directed at the uncontrolled entry of the multinational corporations in the farm sector. Coupled with the introduction of the genetically modified crops, and the unlimited credit support for the agribusiness companies, the focus is to strengthen the ability of the companies to take over the food chain.
I have always warned that agribusiness companies in reality hate farmers. Nowhere in the world have they worked in tandem with farmers. Even in North America and Europe, agribusiness companies have pushed farmers out of agriculture. As a result, only 7,00,000 farming families are left on the farm in the United States. Despite massive subsidies in European Union, one farmer quits agriculture every minute. Knowing well that the markets will displace farmers, the same agriculture prescription is being applied in India.
A Planning Commission study has shown that 73 per cent of the cultivable land in the country is owned by 23.6 per cent of the population. With more and more farmers being displaced through land acquisitions, either for SEZ or for food processing and technology parks or for real estate purposes, land is further getting accumulated in the hands of the elite and resourceful. With chief ministers acting as property dealers, farmers are being lured to divest control over cultivable land. Food security and food self-sufficiency is no longer the country’s political priority.
The government has very conveniently taken refuge behind an NSSO study that says some 40 per cent of the farmers have expressed the desire to quit farming. After all, what the government is facilitating is to make it easier for the farmers to abandon their land. It believes that a rehabilitation policy for the farmers therefore is the need of the hour. What is however not being seen through is that an agrarian economy like India cannot afford large-scale displacement of farmers. It will lead to social unrest the kind of which has not been witnessed. What India needs desperately is a policy paradigm that restores pride in agriculture, stops take-over of agricultural lands, and ensures sustainable livelihoods for 600 million farmers.
Devinder Sharma is a food and agriculture policy analyst. He can be contacted at or visit www.dsharma.net.
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Article in The Times: The Indian Tourist
Delhi Times
Oh bother, it's an Indian tourist!
30 May, 2007 l 0000 hrs ISTlNIKHILA PANT, JAYA DRONA & PALLAVI PASRICHA /TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Going by a recent survey, the ugly Indian tourist is loud, untidy and doesn't believe in tipping the waiters. DT on why the cash-rich Indians fail to score on the etiquette meter . Indians are travelling abroad like never before. Far East, Europe, Australia - the world is their oyster. But are the people of the countries that Indians are visiting appreciating this tourist invasion too? The answer, as provided by a recent survey by Expedia .co.uk, is a clear and resonant no. According to this survey, Indians are the world's second worst tourists, beaten to the post only by the French. The parameters for the survey included behaviour, politeness, willingness to learn the local language, trying local delicacies and spending on the local economy. Indians are least likely to attempt to learn the local language, try out the native delicacies and are also very stingy when it comes to tips. They are also said to be rude and untidy. So, are Indian tourists as ugly as this survey makes them out to be?
Washing dirty laundry in NY
High fliers from India accept this charge, and then add some of their own accusations. Says adman Suhel Seth, "I have seen Indians washing their laundry and drying it on leather sofas at a posh hotel in Manhattan, NY. Some of the richest Indians stand in the lobby of the best hotels in New York and bargain for an upgrade. I have felt embarrassed on more occasions than one because of such behaviour . Once the general manager of a foreign hotel told me, 'I really admire the Indian success stories. What I don't understand is why none of them give their clothes for laundry!'"
Indians also don't have a good standing when it comes to following basic rules related to noise, hygiene etc. Says Pavan Varma, director, ICCR, "We need to work on our etiquette and mobile manners. Mostly, the demands Indians make while vacationing are unfair and the interaction is crude. Decorum often takes a backseat with the nouveau riche. But I must say, I have seen people from other nationalities behaving rudely, and taking advantage of their fair skin. Indians are not half that arrogant."
A tip for the travellers
Heena Akhtar, the COO of a travel agency, agrees with Varma. "Indians are adaptable and take care of the protocol of other countries. Even if they behave badly in India, they improve their general behaviour when abroad," she says.
However, there are certain issues that act as a flashpoint for Indians. "Indian travellers are very finicky about food," says a source from another travel agency. "Indians, with their love for spicy curries, find the European food bland. Also, they find it difficult to settle for beef and pork. To make sure things go fine, some frequent fliers take cooks along."
Another front where the Indian traveller does not score is tipping. "Indians are a hesitant lot when they have to tip at hotels or restaurants," adds Akhtar. As a airhostess with a leading airline adds, "Sometimes, you come across Indian travellers who are looking for a freebie and consider service staff as menials."
Some complimentary hospitality?
However, Indian travellers get a thumbs up from the Indian hospitality industry. They describe the cash-rich Indians as discerning travellers who settle for nothing but the best and can be a little fussy on that account. Parveen Chander, resident manager of the Taj Mahal Hotel says, "Indians know what they want and are very particular about getting their money's worth. The South-East Asians are the most difficult to please. They spend a lot of time to check everything. The Britons also have high expectations and are not very easy to please."
Kshitij Deopuria, a rooms division manager, maintains that the behaviour of Indian tourists is improving. "Sometime back, Indian travellers were known to throw their weight around but now it is not the same. They are very well-behaved, not very finicky and concentrate only on the services. However, they still look out for discounts."
Demand for freebies is one problem that hotels here also face from Indian travellers. "Sometimes, Indian travellers demand complimentary services," says Eros group director, Avneesh Sood, adding, "But then they also spend a lot."
BEST TOURISTS
Japanese Americans Swiss
WORST TOURISTS
France India China
~~~~~~~~~~~
I have my reservations on Americans being the Best tourists. They do seem to throw around the most amount of money, but general perception in Europe & elsewhere of American tourists isnt very positive.
Kim
Oh bother, it's an Indian tourist!
30 May, 2007 l 0000 hrs ISTlNIKHILA PANT, JAYA DRONA & PALLAVI PASRICHA /TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Going by a recent survey, the ugly Indian tourist is loud, untidy and doesn't believe in tipping the waiters. DT on why the cash-rich Indians fail to score on the etiquette meter . Indians are travelling abroad like never before. Far East, Europe, Australia - the world is their oyster. But are the people of the countries that Indians are visiting appreciating this tourist invasion too? The answer, as provided by a recent survey by Expedia .co.uk, is a clear and resonant no. According to this survey, Indians are the world's second worst tourists, beaten to the post only by the French. The parameters for the survey included behaviour, politeness, willingness to learn the local language, trying local delicacies and spending on the local economy. Indians are least likely to attempt to learn the local language, try out the native delicacies and are also very stingy when it comes to tips. They are also said to be rude and untidy. So, are Indian tourists as ugly as this survey makes them out to be?
Washing dirty laundry in NY
High fliers from India accept this charge, and then add some of their own accusations. Says adman Suhel Seth, "I have seen Indians washing their laundry and drying it on leather sofas at a posh hotel in Manhattan, NY. Some of the richest Indians stand in the lobby of the best hotels in New York and bargain for an upgrade. I have felt embarrassed on more occasions than one because of such behaviour . Once the general manager of a foreign hotel told me, 'I really admire the Indian success stories. What I don't understand is why none of them give their clothes for laundry!'"
Indians also don't have a good standing when it comes to following basic rules related to noise, hygiene etc. Says Pavan Varma, director, ICCR, "We need to work on our etiquette and mobile manners. Mostly, the demands Indians make while vacationing are unfair and the interaction is crude. Decorum often takes a backseat with the nouveau riche. But I must say, I have seen people from other nationalities behaving rudely, and taking advantage of their fair skin. Indians are not half that arrogant."
A tip for the travellers
Heena Akhtar, the COO of a travel agency, agrees with Varma. "Indians are adaptable and take care of the protocol of other countries. Even if they behave badly in India, they improve their general behaviour when abroad," she says.
However, there are certain issues that act as a flashpoint for Indians. "Indian travellers are very finicky about food," says a source from another travel agency. "Indians, with their love for spicy curries, find the European food bland. Also, they find it difficult to settle for beef and pork. To make sure things go fine, some frequent fliers take cooks along."
Another front where the Indian traveller does not score is tipping. "Indians are a hesitant lot when they have to tip at hotels or restaurants," adds Akhtar. As a airhostess with a leading airline adds, "Sometimes, you come across Indian travellers who are looking for a freebie and consider service staff as menials."
Some complimentary hospitality?
However, Indian travellers get a thumbs up from the Indian hospitality industry. They describe the cash-rich Indians as discerning travellers who settle for nothing but the best and can be a little fussy on that account. Parveen Chander, resident manager of the Taj Mahal Hotel says, "Indians know what they want and are very particular about getting their money's worth. The South-East Asians are the most difficult to please. They spend a lot of time to check everything. The Britons also have high expectations and are not very easy to please."
Kshitij Deopuria, a rooms division manager, maintains that the behaviour of Indian tourists is improving. "Sometime back, Indian travellers were known to throw their weight around but now it is not the same. They are very well-behaved, not very finicky and concentrate only on the services. However, they still look out for discounts."
Demand for freebies is one problem that hotels here also face from Indian travellers. "Sometimes, Indian travellers demand complimentary services," says Eros group director, Avneesh Sood, adding, "But then they also spend a lot."
BEST TOURISTS
Japanese Americans Swiss
WORST TOURISTS
France India China
~~~~~~~~~~~
I have my reservations on Americans being the Best tourists. They do seem to throw around the most amount of money, but general perception in Europe & elsewhere of American tourists isnt very positive.
Kim
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
