Sky is the limit or is it Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar?

                           
Anybody remotely connected with the game of cricket would love to answer it in favour of the young man who has just turned 37. Let us take a moment to understand what he means to a country and its people where even mediocre passes off as good.

Pages and pages have been written about him and dictionaries have been whetted to find new words to describe his art and yet he conjures something new that challenges the common man and the poet alike to explain and describe.

166 Test matches, 442 One Day matches, 31000 international runs, 93 international centuries - what keeps him going? How does he manage to perform so well for so long? How does he continue to win hearts without losing his credibility at any point of time in his career?

For us to understand this phenomenon of a man, let us try to break him into the different realms of life that he has so successfully mastered in order to be where he is today.

The Love:

The first pertinent factor that explains his longevity in the game is his sheer love for the game. He still treasures the beauty of the game. His celebration in taking Rahul Dravid’s catch (although it was ultimately ruled not out) in the semifinals of IPL 3 showed how much he still enjoys the sport. The game still excites him. He believes that there still remains unexplored beauty in a game that has been dissected by commercialization. His infectious love for the sport transports him to be a school boy who eats lives and breathes the sport. “Love what you do and do what you love” goes Blackberry’s most recent tagline. How true is it of a man who has loved the sport as his dear life for all his life.

The Hunger:

When you love something, you want to do it well and do it again and again, better and better. Sachin has done just that. He has reversed the relationship between age and performance from being directly proportional to inversely proportional. For a man who made his international debut in 1989, it is indeed remarkable that he can carry on like a machine and still capture the hearts of billions of young new cricket watchers today. And even today when he steps on to the cricket field, one can see that the same fire that lit up his eyes two decades ago still burns high and with the same intensity to outperform the others. All artists have the desire to perfect their art. The little master is no different. Once Harsha Bhogle famously said that Sachin actually said “2” to himself before playing a ball and in fact got 2 runs in that ball – that is the masterclass he brings to his game. He has no hesitation to ask even the youngest member of the team about his game. The T20 version was supposedly a young man’s game and supposedly a hitter’s game. Well Sachin proved all that wrong. The class with which he has scored his runs in this year’s IPL shows that a purist, perfect in his game can succeed under any conditions. And Sachin is still one of the quickest runners between the wickets in the Indian team. Although he doesn’t bowl as much these days, Sachin can bowl medium pace, leg spin, off spin , cutters, googlies, the whole bag.

The Commitment:

It is one thing wanting to do well and another putting in the effort. For two decades now, Tendulkar has gone through the grind of international cricket – the travel, long tours, time away from family and home, failures, slumps – and yet one can never fault him for his commitment to the team and the game.

He gives it his all. Commitment involves willingness to put leave no stone unturned in the pursuit of excellence. Who can forget the fact that as a young man, he used to shadow practice at midnight before a match when all the other players would be fast asleep. Who can forget those nets sessions where Sachin would ask the local bowlers to bowl around the wicket at his leg stump anticipating Shane Warne’s tactics in 1998 and bringing all those shots into play in a rampaging innings at Chennai. Even at this age when it would be easy for him to just sit back and relax, he is constantly seeking to refine his game, modify, find new shots, helping young cricketers.

The Humility:

Humility is always a defining trait of being Sachin. He respects the game and always treats it as above all individuals. He has carried the imagination, hopes and pressures of billions of people on his shoulders match after match, year after year for 20 long years. That kind of pressure can break a brittle mind but not Sachin’s. The adulation and the attention have ruined many a great talent but could not even touch the great man. It is not easy. Fame and fortune sit lightly on Sachin, they say. Well they are wrong. They have not sat at all. They have just been standing at arm’s length waiting for the master to order them to good deeds. Sachin soaks in these pressures and converts them into energy and motivation he can use on the field. This has also helped him to be one of the most controversy free cricketers. He has never sledged. He has never been involved in match fixing or ball tampering or wild partying. There has been not one allegation of misconduct against him. He has never said no to an interview. He has never declined an autograph. He believes in setting the right example to kids. He loves them. He becomes like them when he is on a cricket field. That is how he conquers all these pressures. For these pressures don’t mean anything to children. That is how he lords over the cricket field. By respecting the game so much and loving the game so much, he masters the game. Even today, if anybody says they are not disappointed when Sachin gets out, I’d question their judgement.

No article about Sachin can be considered complete without mentioning some of his innings as the writer’s favourites. It is very difficult to pick from 31000 international runs and 93 hundreds but again it is also so beautifully romantic and poignant to relive those great moments when nothing else seemed to matter in the world – just watching one man bat would wipe away all the miseries and worries of this world. So let me indulge myself here by listing 10 best knocks each in Test and One day matches:

One Dayers:

1. 200 not out vs South Africa, 2010: Of course, what else could it have been? The game’s first double hundred and it inevitably came from the greatest One Day cricketer of all times. Tendulkar again asserted his landlord rights over the format.

2. 175 vs Australia, 2009: The innings that breathed life into the 50 over format after the siege by T20. Sachin single handedly took India to the doorstep of an otherwise unimaginable victory chasing a target of 350.

3. 143 vs Australia, 1998: The Sharjah Desert Storm, it was called. It was an incredible knock, matched only by the importance of the situation Sachin decimated the Aussie bowling attack to single handedly take India into the finals of the tournament. Even today, dictionaries cannot whet the appetite to describe that innings. It was batting nirvana.

4. 134 vs Australia, 1998: It was the final of the tournament and India again chased a stiff target of 270. Sachin, on his birthday, took it upon his shoulders to win the tournament for the country. It was India’s most productive year in terms of trophies won and Sachin of course was the chief architect.

5. 98 vs Pakistan, 2003: A world cup match against arch rivals that would determine who would go through to the next round. India was chasing 275. Sehwag was belligerent while it lasted for 5 overs. Sachin’s calculated assault against one of the most fearsome bowling attacks of the time – Wasim, Waqar and Shoaib Akhtar, brought India victory and thrust to the finals of the tournament.

6. 117 vs Australia, 2008: The first final of the last trination tournament in the Australian summer. India chasing again. Sachin was simply too good for the likes of Lee, Johnson, Bracken and Clarke.

7. 140 not out vs Kenya, 1999, Tendulkar flew in from his father’s funeral to play a very emotional and yet important knock that helped India qualify for the Super Six of the World Cup.

8. 141 vs Australia, 1998: It was the first Mini World Cup – the precursor to today’s Champions Trophy. Sachin took the Aussie attack of Mcgrath, Kaspwowicsz, Warne and Brendon Julian to the cleaners.

9. 118 vs Pakistan, 1996: Sharjah once again was the ambience of a Tendulkar whirlwind that smashed the likes of Wasim, Waqar, Saqlain, Aquib Javed and Ata-ur-Rahman almost had his boot also hit for sixer.

10. 82 vs New Zealand, 1994: It was the innings that defined Sachin as an opening batsman in One Day Cricket. Mark Greatbatch had popularized the concept of pinch hitting in the initial overs. Sachin played an extraordinary innings of 82 off 49 balls to announce the arrival of a master.


Tests:

1. 155 vs South Africa, 2001: India was in trouble and Pollock, Ntini and Hayward and Klusener were steaming in. Sachin counterattacked and along with Sehwag brought India a respectable total.

2. 169 vs South Africa, 1997: India had lost the 1st Test badly and South Africa had put on a huge score in the second test. Sachin hit back at one of the fastest attacks in the world – Donald, Pollock, Klusener and Mcmillan. It took an amazing catch from Adam Bacher to stop a marauding Sachin.

3. 155 not out vs Australia, 1998: It was the first test of the series and Shane Warne had priced out Sachin cheaply in the first innings. Sachin charged the Aussie attack in the second innings and left Warne in almost tears with his shots over midwicket.

4. 136 vs Pakistan, 1999: An innings that would always pain him for after having batted through back pain and taken India from 62 for 5 to within 13 runs of victory, Sachin was foxed by the wily Saqlain and Indian tail messed it up to lose the game.

5. 103 not out vs England, 2008: A remarkably efficient innings. India was chasing 387 and Sehwag had given a dream start. Sachin controlled the innings on a 5th day turner to register a superb victory.

6. 241 not out vs Australia, 2004: Sydney witnessed a different innings, not the flamboyant Sachin that we usually see but a mellowed down grinding innings - a hundred after 2 years, Sachin silenced his critics who wrote him off. The innings did not have one single cover drive.

7. 194 not out vs Pakistan, Multan: The test will be more remembered for Sehwag’s triple hundred- the first by an Indian in Tests. Sachin had scored back to back hundreds after the Sydney double but this innings was more fluent and we knew he was back.

8. 193 vs England, 2002: A fluent punishing knock at Leeds that got India its first victory in England after a long time. The big 3 – Saurav, Sachin and Rahul all scored hundreds.

9. 116 vs Australia, 1999: Melbourne watched in awe as the great man pummeled the Aussie attach and was making the world’s biggest ground look small. In a series that was marred by poor umpiring against him where he was even given out LBW when he was halfway down the pitch and the ball hit his arm, Sachin had battled single handedly.

10. 114 vs Australia, 1992: Perth was one of the liveliest tracks in the world with pace and bounce. Mcdermott and Merv Hughes breathed fire but a 19 year old Sachin met fire with fire just as he had one in the previous test at Sydney where he had dismantled a hapless debutante Shane Warne.

What an experience, each of these innings was and the countless others.

The critic:

There is bound to be and there have been criticisms thrown at him at different times. He has never been a match winner, he has always failed in the most crucial matches, and he puts self before the team and all that. Well, to me they are just rubbish. Yes he should have won us 1996 World Cup semifinal against SriLanka. Well remember India was 90 for 1 when he got out for 65. India was 120 for 8 when the match was forfeited due to unruly crowd. Yes he failed in the 2003 World Cup final. But he had scored 670 runs in the tournament and was the highest run getter converting an abysmal start to a dream run. The law of averages had to catch up somehow. Sachin himself would be the first person to admit that he should have won these games for his team. It will irk him no end and will push him to somehow do it somewhere along the line – a World Cup victory would be the crowning glory to the King of One Day cricket.

Yes there have been truly great cricketers who have played the game with such passion, panache and penchant for the game and their talents and every nation during every period has thrown up these giants. Richards, Lara, Steve Waugh, Ponting, Gilchrist, Kallis, Dravid, Ganguly, Flintoff, McGrath, Warne, Wasim, Waqar, Ambrose, Walsh, Kumble, Laxman and the list can go on. All of these cricketers have been a part of the era in which Sachin has played. Sachin has just outlasted all of them.

Brian Lara would have been the sole lord of the game. Ricky Ponting would have been the best One Day player. Rahul Dravid would have been India’s greatest test batsman hands down. VVS Laxman would have been the game’s greatest purist delight. There may not have been an argument on any of the above if not for one man – Sachin Tendulkar. In an era where even good is great, Sachin is beyond compare. He, for me, has been the game’s best ambassador for over two decades.

So is he a man, a machine, a myth or just a product of the television era? How does it matter? If the fire is still burning in him to achieve some more unimaginable feats, we are all blessed to be enthralled.

Go on Sachin. Keep thrilling us. It is a sheer pleasure. Happy Birthday!!

The Dialectics of Human Perception

“Perception alters vision”, says my brother Saravanan. And so it does…

But what exactly are the ramifications of such an alteration must be the focus of all students of human nature. That there should be such an alteration is inevitable upon the movement of civilization and living.

How does this alteration happen? What are the conditions leading up to this alteration? What are the factors that illuminate or darken the effects of such an alteration?

The order of things in this world now exists as a result of their formation. The sheer physicality of nature is supposedly predictable, in increasing intensity and width, with the growth of species. And while such physical dynamics seeks rightful claims for study, it is not my bone of contention at this moment.

It is the sum total of human perceptive vision and its implications that I seek to explain (or even explain away).

With the growth in the number of the human species, the physical nature of the world was altered in order to create the inexorable, complex, enveloping whole termed easily as “human nature”. This human nature changed and re-formed itself with increasing interaction between members as well as that between members with physical nature. I do realize that my above two sentences stop just short of a dangerous reductionism, for what I have briefed in two sentences is, indeed, “the story of civilization”, to use Will Durant’s popular conception. However, despite a temptation, the story of civilization is neither my focus nor my academic wishful ness at this juncture.

Thus the interaction influenced the core called human nature. And as the habitation area increased, this complex called “human nature”, itself influenced and determined the movement and the growth of such civilization. And then were formed the villages, towns, cities and nation-states. This would be the macrocosmic canopy into which the microcosmic individual phenomenology enters.

At the microcosmic level, the individual is born into an existing complex (nature or culture, in simple terms). The growth of the individual and his forays into the social world are determined by the existing patterns that the inherent nature, or culture, provides. And the fluctuations or conflicts arise out of differences of evaluation of the culture complex.

The individual disorientation with the normative patterns of the cultural complex produces conflicts. Differing individual perceptions also produce conflicts. Nonetheless, the differences explicate the growth of civilization and the complexity of the human mind incorporating the whole ontology and the phylogeny divergence. Such differences in fact engender the growth of the social complex which in turn influences the movement of civilization.
Every human perception is actually an interpretation of the existing social complex and an evaluation of the individual experiences with both the social as well as the physical world. (I am not trying to bring in the whole Kantian discourse, for that would need an attendant set of explanations which might digress the path of this essay. Kantian discourse by itself requires a devoted study, understanding and explanation which make it a field of focus too large for the purview of this essay).
Every evaluation and the preceding interpretation determine the individuals’ outlook on life in general and their own lives in particular. This outlook on life provides the canvas for further evaluations and interpretations of the experiences that are to come.

And so on goes the dialectic.

This, in my opinion, is the ultimate reason and explanation of all perceivable things, order of things, the movement of such an order and the orientational dynamics of these movements.

Let me summarize the dialectic then: physical elements are formed; humanity thrives on these physical elements and these interactions lead to the formation of a social complex; such a social complex comes to assume a pervasive identity by itself (with variations across space, time and distance); the identity then influences and shapes the social complex of the progeny; the progeny interpret their own personal experiences in terms of their evaluation of the imposed, inhering social whole as well the changes they wish to see in them. And such experiences pave the way for future experiences. This is the cycle of the dialectical movement of history, the most relatively absolute (the closest I can come to “absolute”) explanation of the order of things, first and final causes, origins, purposes and effects of the existence of such an order. The order keeps changing, keeps shifting, incorporating elements that are new, altered or the old remolded into the current dimensions of space, time, distance and mind.

Despite these minor aberrations or fluctuations, the underlying canopy remains stable and so do the dynamics and the process. The inevitability of the movement can never be over-emphasized.

(And in my opinion, this movement is not a single, huge circle or ellipse or a straight line, as differing schools like evolutionists, functionalists or evangelists have claimed.
It is like a solenoid --- spring-like movement, consisting of circles of change moving forward across time, distance, mind, self and society!! )

The Spirit of Human Nature

Oh ye sprit of human nature?
Wherefore art thou?
I searched for you everywhere
And found thus !!

Thou art
Aestheticity of Nature
Brilliance of human soul
Causal link of nature to human mind
Divine sense impressions in the mind
Exalting thoughts that canvas these impressions
Fluent language that expresses these thoughts
Galaxy of meanings that permeate the language
Halo of perceptions that absorb these meanings
Interpretations that complete these perceptions
Journeys that ride on these interpretations
Knowledge that accrues from these journeys
Literature that portrays this knowledge
Metaphors and meta-narratives which construct around such literature
Nebulous new nature that this narrative generates
Odyssey and oeuvres populating this nebulous nature
Pedagogy of a new existence sprouting from the odyssey
Quintessence of such a self-generating dynamics
Radiance of rationality emanating from this concerted quintessence
Spirit that is born of such radiant reason
Themes and theatrics that this spirit encounters and alters
Ultimacy gained by this spiral onward movement of the spirit through the themes
Victory of this movement over its own ultimate nature
Wonderous new world that the victory abrogates
Xrays and xylems that ebb out of this brave new world
Yonder that these x-rays reach out to
Zest and zeal of life that is created at yonder!!!

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!

"Thou art the summum bonnum"

Making Sense of Life ?

What is life? What are its meanings? What are its natures? What are its origins? What are its ends? What are its objectives? What are its principles? What are its courses? What are its components?

Is life merely the act of living now? Or is it the process of living over a period of time? Is life merely living, then? Does it mean, then, that anybody who is living has a life? How many people believe that they have no life since they have no relations? Do relations make life, then? Well how many people accord prime importance to possessions? Is possession life then? How many people take money as their life? Is it money then that is life? They say life is an experience while money is an object. Or is it really?

Money, they say, is not in what it is but what it does. Money, they say, makes many. In a nation of one billion people, how many billionaires are there? Is money life? Then what about the experience of life?

Is life an experience of consciousness? An awareness of the self? Then where does this self lie in us? George Herbert Mead, the father of symbolic interactionism, said "self is not a physical structure but a mental process of emerging awareness". But without the physical perpetuation of life in the body, how can one have life? In that case, is life all about physical existence?

Some say it is meaningful physical existence. Then what is that meaning that makes life liveable? Is it kinship? How many people remember and interact with kins? Is it wealth? How many people who live can claim to have a wealth? It is religion then that gives the meaning? How many lives have been taken in the name of religion? Is it love that gives meaning? How many are lovers of life?

What is life then? Is it physical sensibilities, emotional underpinnings, mental processes, intellectual searches, spiritual journeys or a combination of all of these? Or is it people- friends, relatives, acquaintances, their goals, dreams, networks, habits and social processes that make life?

Is there an answer? Is there one answer or many?

Am I expected to give these answers?

What the hell, somebody told me it was all about asking the right questions !!

History - Does it make sense ?

History- does it make sense?

The teaching of history in schools or colleges does indeed make one ask the question- is history relevant for me? And in a country that boasts of such distinguished writers on history as Amartya Sen, Romila Thapar, K.N.Panikkar, and Ramachandra Guha among others, it is indeed pitiable that the teaching of history is so pervasively pedantic.

But is that all there is to history? Is history a sheer mass of insignificant data as to how many wars were fought and won, how many taxes were imposed and when etc? That would be a grossly blindfolded and pedestrian conclusion. I confess I am no scholar in history. But from what I have understood of history, it is much more than what is taught in schools or written in textbooks. And I am sure the historians would agree. The focus of teaching history in schools is directed towards obtaining maximum marks. That, however, does not mean history itself is meaningless. And history does not merely involve study of where one and one’s ancestors have descended from.

The academic discipline called history may attain different levels of relevance in different places at different times. But history as a phenomenon, a movement, a truism is inherent to human social life.

Sir Isaiah Berlin, arguably the greatest historian of ideas, wrote: “the human species alone have the curiosity to know how they have come to where they have.” And Berlin is right. One may not wish to know who ruled where a thousand years ago but everybody certainly wants to know the phases their own lives had passed through in reaching the current stage. Friedrich Nietzsche, much reviled for his ahistorical style of writing, wrote in his ‘On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life’: “the point of studying history is not to discover the ‘truth’ of past events. We need history for life and action”

History is an observation and explanation of how things happen. And when it comes to human observation, there will always be a multitude of perceptions. That is the ingenuity of the Homo sapiens. Yes history is a tale of victors. Yes European history is most widespread. But there has always existed and there shall always exist, alternate histories, recorded or unrecorded, if only we are willing to look for it. And I do not merely refer to Orientalism or subaltern history alone but also to heritages, folktales, oral history and myths. Yes myths too! Myth may be an antonym of history but myth is an incontrovertible part of the history of a specific time and place.

This is social history- the intercourse of sociology with history, a sequential understanding of how people, across time and distance, have responded and reacted to situations in their lives, both as individuals and as groups, and in doing so, how they have created newer situations that demand newer responses. Isn’t this history? And don’t we all, without exception, want to study this?

So where is the line of discord? In the educational system in the country! The teaching of history requires a new focus, method, orientation and approach. Till then, history will be irrelevant and we will see people manipulate and distort the nature of history. To blame his acts of genocide on history is baseless, for as Marx said, “men make their own history”, and not the other way around. So it is time for us to take control of our own history. George Orwell’s words from his “1984” echo resonantly here: “Who controls the present controls the past. Who controls the past controls the future”.

And unless and until we individually and collectively, take control of our present, Marx would sing happily: “History repeats itself; the first time as tragedy; the next time as farce”.

Doesn’t history make sense now?