Are we reading less literature now than we used to?
Are we having an information overload but a lot of it is junk?
Are we wanting everything in byte sized chunks, so reading thick, literary works is passe?
As I look around me, it does look like people are reading less books.
There is information overload- emails, magazines, television, but a piece of literature is being read less often.
In fact, the major time for reading is commuting to and from work- and that time, we probably read either the morning newspaper going to work or just unwinding for the day after work. At home, family and television dominate proceedings. At work, everything is transactional- needed for action items, at home, we are either with family or glued to television. When do we have leisure, thinking time just to ourselves- the ability to walk into nowhere, think about what we are doing, read a great piece of literature- have our lives become so transactional that we do not have time to appreciate the finer things in life. Are we so busy chasing them when we may just not have the time to enjoy them at all?
The lack of reading is only a symptom of the instant gratification culture of our generation.
We must remember that reading is not just for technical advancement in a field but more broadly a practice for expanding horizons and gaining multiple perspectives. It requires discipline, it fires our imagination, influences our thinking and values and makes us connect as a civilization at a fundamental level. Coelho's work is just as relevant in South America, as it is in Asia or in the US. That is because it is deeply human and the reading habit connects us to each other at that fundamental level.
The fact that I havent read something noteworthy in the last three months worries me.
I should be done writing and read something right now!
Tuesday, October 25, 2005
Monday, October 24, 2005
The business of credit
I am not a great believer in taking on debt. I don’t like it.
When I was 12, I read David Copperfield and I still remember some pearls of wisdom from Charles Dickens that went something like if you earn 20 pounds and you spend 19 pounds, 90 shillings, you will be happy but if you spend 21 pounds, you will be miserable forever. That statement has just stuck in my head since. As a result, I have tried to live within my means. Hence, any instrument that makes me spend some more is something I run away from. I dislike credit cards. When I came from Singapore to the US, I virtually stopped using my credit card. I was a student and I wanted to live like that. Only cash, no credit card.
Now, I’m working and I need to buy a car and very soon, we might think of buying a home. As we surveyed the market, we found that the interest rate for us would be ridiculously high.
Reason: we do not have an established credit history in the US.
Actually, this society encourages you to have loans, otherwise you are penalized. No credit is not good- its BAD! This, for me, is counter-intuitive. The fact that I dont have a loan is working against me here. To get a low interest rate, I should have actually taken a loan, paids some money off thereby proving that I have the capability to repay.
This is a delicate balance. When do you know how much you can afford if you can always have credit? When do you know you have gone over the edge? Not by abstaining. This is what I am doing and am penalized for it. You have to get into the system, get loans that you well know you can pay off, then systematically start paying them off. If there is something that comes along the way, you just need to resist despite the fact you can afford it. And how many of us can do that?
Charles Dickens wasn’t wrong. But financial planning isn’t as simple as it used to be centuries back. We have got to make our own circle of material need even if the credit world could afford us something more. Better safe than sorry!
When I was 12, I read David Copperfield and I still remember some pearls of wisdom from Charles Dickens that went something like if you earn 20 pounds and you spend 19 pounds, 90 shillings, you will be happy but if you spend 21 pounds, you will be miserable forever. That statement has just stuck in my head since. As a result, I have tried to live within my means. Hence, any instrument that makes me spend some more is something I run away from. I dislike credit cards. When I came from Singapore to the US, I virtually stopped using my credit card. I was a student and I wanted to live like that. Only cash, no credit card.
Now, I’m working and I need to buy a car and very soon, we might think of buying a home. As we surveyed the market, we found that the interest rate for us would be ridiculously high.
Reason: we do not have an established credit history in the US.
Actually, this society encourages you to have loans, otherwise you are penalized. No credit is not good- its BAD! This, for me, is counter-intuitive. The fact that I dont have a loan is working against me here. To get a low interest rate, I should have actually taken a loan, paids some money off thereby proving that I have the capability to repay.
This is a delicate balance. When do you know how much you can afford if you can always have credit? When do you know you have gone over the edge? Not by abstaining. This is what I am doing and am penalized for it. You have to get into the system, get loans that you well know you can pay off, then systematically start paying them off. If there is something that comes along the way, you just need to resist despite the fact you can afford it. And how many of us can do that?
Charles Dickens wasn’t wrong. But financial planning isn’t as simple as it used to be centuries back. We have got to make our own circle of material need even if the credit world could afford us something more. Better safe than sorry!
Sunday, October 23, 2005
Can India develop despite its politicians?
Its a moot question.
India has rich natural resources, bright, educated middle class, a great work ethic and a sound economic base.
But it is run by politicians. Corrupt, unscrupulous and hideously short-sighted.
Till 1991, a socialistic democracy hiding incredible economic inefficiencies and an unsustainable subsidies drove us to the brink of economic disaster. Since then, we have had Finance Ministers, who have taken the country progressively towards liberalization, but are constantly hindered by the inept politicians whose base is the illiterate millions, who shall continue to stay illiterate if these politicians have their way.
Most recently, a former Prime Minister, Deve Gowda (who was known to sleep in cabinet meetings, no less) almost charged Infosys, one of India's jewels in the IT crown with doing virtually nothing for Karnataka. The Chairman of Infosys, Narayan Murthy, widely hailed around the world as one of the most dynamic leaders of the IT industry, was understandably miffed. He sent a point by point rejoined to this statement.
I have met Narayan Murthy. Spent half a day with him. Talking about building a world class organization in the heart of Bangalore, the IT capital of India. He is sincere, simple and straightforward, the very antithesis of an Indian politician. He started Infosys in 1981 with about $250 dollars in seed capital. In 1999, it became the first Indian company to be listed in the US and has exceeded analyst expectations quarter after quarter. Through its stock option program, it has made thousands of its employees great ownership and made them rich.
Narayan Murthy doesnt take much credit for this. He credits it to the team. His leadership philosophy is simple- hire bright people, give them a free reign, have a pay for performance culture and you will succeed. And he has made many in the indians middle class realize a dream they never thought would come true in their lifetime.
To question his commitment to India's development is blasphemous. By doing that, Indian politicans have only shown that they are worthy of nothing but contempt.
There are some islands of hope like the Cambridge educated economist, Manmohan Singh who is India's PM and continues to fight a lone battle for liberalization and integrating us into the world economy. More power to people like him but unfortunately such people in a minority.
For the sake of my own countrymen, I hope our politicians do minimal damage as our economy rolls on at a brisk 6-8% growth rate. I see them as impediments rather than enablers. Why we need them at all is a good question.
Can we sustain momentum despite our politicians? I am confident we will because we have too many bright hardworking people to let this slip from our hands, inept politicians notwithstanding!
India has rich natural resources, bright, educated middle class, a great work ethic and a sound economic base.
But it is run by politicians. Corrupt, unscrupulous and hideously short-sighted.
Till 1991, a socialistic democracy hiding incredible economic inefficiencies and an unsustainable subsidies drove us to the brink of economic disaster. Since then, we have had Finance Ministers, who have taken the country progressively towards liberalization, but are constantly hindered by the inept politicians whose base is the illiterate millions, who shall continue to stay illiterate if these politicians have their way.
Most recently, a former Prime Minister, Deve Gowda (who was known to sleep in cabinet meetings, no less) almost charged Infosys, one of India's jewels in the IT crown with doing virtually nothing for Karnataka. The Chairman of Infosys, Narayan Murthy, widely hailed around the world as one of the most dynamic leaders of the IT industry, was understandably miffed. He sent a point by point rejoined to this statement.
I have met Narayan Murthy. Spent half a day with him. Talking about building a world class organization in the heart of Bangalore, the IT capital of India. He is sincere, simple and straightforward, the very antithesis of an Indian politician. He started Infosys in 1981 with about $250 dollars in seed capital. In 1999, it became the first Indian company to be listed in the US and has exceeded analyst expectations quarter after quarter. Through its stock option program, it has made thousands of its employees great ownership and made them rich.
Narayan Murthy doesnt take much credit for this. He credits it to the team. His leadership philosophy is simple- hire bright people, give them a free reign, have a pay for performance culture and you will succeed. And he has made many in the indians middle class realize a dream they never thought would come true in their lifetime.
To question his commitment to India's development is blasphemous. By doing that, Indian politicans have only shown that they are worthy of nothing but contempt.
There are some islands of hope like the Cambridge educated economist, Manmohan Singh who is India's PM and continues to fight a lone battle for liberalization and integrating us into the world economy. More power to people like him but unfortunately such people in a minority.
For the sake of my own countrymen, I hope our politicians do minimal damage as our economy rolls on at a brisk 6-8% growth rate. I see them as impediments rather than enablers. Why we need them at all is a good question.
Can we sustain momentum despite our politicians? I am confident we will because we have too many bright hardworking people to let this slip from our hands, inept politicians notwithstanding!
Monday, October 17, 2005
A disappointing cricket spectacle
The Super Series just ended- the cricket super series I mean. It was Australia against World XI, a conglomeration of the very best talent in the world barring Sachin Tendulkar, who is still recovering from his tennis elbow. The last time something like this was played was way back in 1971, incidentally again in Australia and the hype for this series was enormous. The very best talent in the world had been put together to challenge the mighty Aussies at their home turf.
It turned out to be a no contest. The World XI got thrashed- in both versions of the game, the one dayers and the tests. What was being projected as the cricket spectacle of the year turned to be a damp squib. The World XI batsmen just couldnt tackle the guile of the Warne and Macgill on a turning Sydney track. But there is more to it than meets the eye.
The broader question is- can you get talented individuals together into a cohesive team within a very short span of time?
And the answer seems to be no. Individuals may be talented but the team is more than a summation of individual talents- it requires complementarity, camaderie and passion, something that was clearly missing from the World XI players whose individual records were impeccable but collectively as a team, they failed miserably. Top teams aren't created overnight- they require painstaking effort to mould individual talents into a cohesive, fighting unit. That goes for sports teams as much as it goes for businesses. Individual brilliance needs to be supplemented with appropriate team dynamics for best synergies to take place. The spectacle Down Under only goes to reinforce that point!
It turned out to be a no contest. The World XI got thrashed- in both versions of the game, the one dayers and the tests. What was being projected as the cricket spectacle of the year turned to be a damp squib. The World XI batsmen just couldnt tackle the guile of the Warne and Macgill on a turning Sydney track. But there is more to it than meets the eye.
The broader question is- can you get talented individuals together into a cohesive team within a very short span of time?
And the answer seems to be no. Individuals may be talented but the team is more than a summation of individual talents- it requires complementarity, camaderie and passion, something that was clearly missing from the World XI players whose individual records were impeccable but collectively as a team, they failed miserably. Top teams aren't created overnight- they require painstaking effort to mould individual talents into a cohesive, fighting unit. That goes for sports teams as much as it goes for businesses. Individual brilliance needs to be supplemented with appropriate team dynamics for best synergies to take place. The spectacle Down Under only goes to reinforce that point!
Saturday, October 15, 2005
Innovation in government!
We don't usually associate government with any kind of innovation. Its all about following rules and procedures and delays, particularly in most of the developing countries. So when you come across an instance of creative thinking and innovation, you stand up, take notice and most importantly, applaud an effort that would have an impact throughout the society that the particular government is operating in.
The Philippine government is much maligned- known for cronyism and corruption, but there are pockets of excellence and I observed one such pocket in the my recent visit to the country. I met with Mike Luz, former Professor of mine at the Asian Institute of Management, an alumnus of Harvard (much before my batch, I must add), and currently the Undersecretary of Education in the Phillipine government. As I spoke to him and asked him about what he was doing, he started animatedly telling me about some of the things he has been involved in.
Amongst the many initiatives he spoke about, one stood out in my mind. This was about the distribution of books in schools all over the country. This is a massive undertaking and given the fact that Philippines is an island country and the roads and railroads aren't the finest in the world, it is very difficult to reach the remote corners of the country. As a result, books that were meant for students would get purchased but would never be distributed to some parts simply because of logistical constraints. Areas were far off, there was barely a motorable road and just the cost of getting the books there was a humungous undertaking for the government. Like a true social scientist, Mike decided to go to one such far flung area and find out for himself what was going on. He chose the area of Masbate. I haven't been there but apparently, the place is pretty difficult to get to. It was raining, the roads were muddy and even as Mike travelled in the jeep for three hours, he realized people had a point. This was indeed a very difficult area to distribute books to. And to have dedicated trucks that would carry books to these areas would be pretty darn expensive and the government wouldn't have the money for it.
As Mike travelled with his team in the jeep, they stopped by a food stall just to have a break. It was muggy, it had been a long journey and this was a forlorn area. Three hours of bumpy travel in a rickety jeep had not been pleasant. Just as there were some seeds of despair weaving their way in, there was a while and red truck that passed by- the only the other vehicle they had seen for about the three hours of travel that they had done. This was Coke! And Mike knew what he had to do. He immediately went back to Manila, called up the Coke guys and struck a deal with them that they would distribute the books to the remotest parts of the Philippines even as they would distreibute their bottles during the normal course fo duty. No extra cost, no hassle, no extra government spending and efficiency of combining the two things in the same distribution mechanism. The solution was a classic win-win. The Department of Education would be able to distribute books in a timely fashion to the remotest corner fo the Philippines, Coke would do its bit for social responsibility with just the extra effort of picking up the books along with the bottles!
I found this story fascinating in terms of getting to the root of the problem, identifying it, thinking out the box and finding a solution that would benefit everyone involved. Too often, we throw up in hands and say this can't be done. And what better place to say it than in the government. The Coke- Dept of Education partnership is a classic case of innovation in the government and if it can be done there, I dont see why such initiatives cannot happen everywhere.
Why such initiatives are even more fulfilling is that they are attempting to raise the level of education in the developing countries and good education is only sustainable antidote to poverty in my view. Lets hope many more initiatives like this happen in the future.
The Philippine government is much maligned- known for cronyism and corruption, but there are pockets of excellence and I observed one such pocket in the my recent visit to the country. I met with Mike Luz, former Professor of mine at the Asian Institute of Management, an alumnus of Harvard (much before my batch, I must add), and currently the Undersecretary of Education in the Phillipine government. As I spoke to him and asked him about what he was doing, he started animatedly telling me about some of the things he has been involved in.
Amongst the many initiatives he spoke about, one stood out in my mind. This was about the distribution of books in schools all over the country. This is a massive undertaking and given the fact that Philippines is an island country and the roads and railroads aren't the finest in the world, it is very difficult to reach the remote corners of the country. As a result, books that were meant for students would get purchased but would never be distributed to some parts simply because of logistical constraints. Areas were far off, there was barely a motorable road and just the cost of getting the books there was a humungous undertaking for the government. Like a true social scientist, Mike decided to go to one such far flung area and find out for himself what was going on. He chose the area of Masbate. I haven't been there but apparently, the place is pretty difficult to get to. It was raining, the roads were muddy and even as Mike travelled in the jeep for three hours, he realized people had a point. This was indeed a very difficult area to distribute books to. And to have dedicated trucks that would carry books to these areas would be pretty darn expensive and the government wouldn't have the money for it.
As Mike travelled with his team in the jeep, they stopped by a food stall just to have a break. It was muggy, it had been a long journey and this was a forlorn area. Three hours of bumpy travel in a rickety jeep had not been pleasant. Just as there were some seeds of despair weaving their way in, there was a while and red truck that passed by- the only the other vehicle they had seen for about the three hours of travel that they had done. This was Coke! And Mike knew what he had to do. He immediately went back to Manila, called up the Coke guys and struck a deal with them that they would distribute the books to the remotest parts of the Philippines even as they would distreibute their bottles during the normal course fo duty. No extra cost, no hassle, no extra government spending and efficiency of combining the two things in the same distribution mechanism. The solution was a classic win-win. The Department of Education would be able to distribute books in a timely fashion to the remotest corner fo the Philippines, Coke would do its bit for social responsibility with just the extra effort of picking up the books along with the bottles!
I found this story fascinating in terms of getting to the root of the problem, identifying it, thinking out the box and finding a solution that would benefit everyone involved. Too often, we throw up in hands and say this can't be done. And what better place to say it than in the government. The Coke- Dept of Education partnership is a classic case of innovation in the government and if it can be done there, I dont see why such initiatives cannot happen everywhere.
Why such initiatives are even more fulfilling is that they are attempting to raise the level of education in the developing countries and good education is only sustainable antidote to poverty in my view. Lets hope many more initiatives like this happen in the future.
Monday, October 10, 2005
The weekend after...
There was a certain buzz in Boston on Friday. Everybody was talking about the Red Sox- the team that won the World Series after 86 years last year with a heroic comeback victory against the mighty Yankees. This time, the Sox were down 0-2 against Chicago and it was a must win game. At 4pm, the city came to complete standstill. Either you were at Fenway Park at the game or you were somewhere close to a television watching the game.
I got out of office at about 5:30 with the Sox trailing but by the time I got home, they had levelled the scores. There was a quiet confidence, almost a certain smugness about the New England fans. They somehow knew their team would deliver. They beat the Yankees last year at Yankee stadium, Chicago at their own home turf would be a piece of cake. The Red Sox fans are believers- they believe in their team- utmost devotion and almost maniacal passion. They somehow knew that the team would be able to come back on Friday, then win the game on Saturday and a final one on Sunday to make the finals of the ALCS. But even the game progressed, the hitters struggled and the pitchers lost their way. Chicago was clinical, less flair but flawless in execution of their plan. By 7:30, the Boston dream was over- at least for this year. We went out for dinner- the raods were empty and there was almost a pall of gloom in the city. The season was over- for good. Sense of dejection. Loss. Confusion about how a team this good could lose its way after promising so much.
That gloom was compounded by the wet weather. Cold and damp, the Fall suddenly turned into a glimpse of what the winter might be like. It took one night for me to move from a t-shirt to a jacket but the indefatigable Red Sox fan was still out, this time hoping for the season to turn next year. Fans started discussing what the team would look like next year- who would stay and who would go. It was almost as if fans had put behind this year and were looking forward to 2006 almost knowing that the team would deliver- this was just a minor blip in what is surely the best team in the business. That optimism is what I like about the New England fan. Always a believer, the fan doesnt give up at all. Shrugs his shoulders, has a Sam Adams, a good sleep and starts preparing for the future. A very good attitude to have.
In a way, I have both been a participant as well as an observer of the Red Sox mania through two seasons- one a fascinating come from behind historic victory and now, a tragic loss. But the attitude of the fan has been consistent- a passion to support the team come what may. This may be a wet weekend and the Gods may be mourning as well but I am sure the fan will turn up at Fenway next season just as optimistic and sure about victory as he has been ever in his life. For the rest of the year, Boston would be following football! As for me, I shall continue to see what sites I can surf to follow my own passion for cricket and soccer, two games that are hardly played on this continent. They really don't know what they are missing out on!
The buzz of Friday may be gone, but the optimism remains and thats what is most important.
I got out of office at about 5:30 with the Sox trailing but by the time I got home, they had levelled the scores. There was a quiet confidence, almost a certain smugness about the New England fans. They somehow knew their team would deliver. They beat the Yankees last year at Yankee stadium, Chicago at their own home turf would be a piece of cake. The Red Sox fans are believers- they believe in their team- utmost devotion and almost maniacal passion. They somehow knew that the team would be able to come back on Friday, then win the game on Saturday and a final one on Sunday to make the finals of the ALCS. But even the game progressed, the hitters struggled and the pitchers lost their way. Chicago was clinical, less flair but flawless in execution of their plan. By 7:30, the Boston dream was over- at least for this year. We went out for dinner- the raods were empty and there was almost a pall of gloom in the city. The season was over- for good. Sense of dejection. Loss. Confusion about how a team this good could lose its way after promising so much.
That gloom was compounded by the wet weather. Cold and damp, the Fall suddenly turned into a glimpse of what the winter might be like. It took one night for me to move from a t-shirt to a jacket but the indefatigable Red Sox fan was still out, this time hoping for the season to turn next year. Fans started discussing what the team would look like next year- who would stay and who would go. It was almost as if fans had put behind this year and were looking forward to 2006 almost knowing that the team would deliver- this was just a minor blip in what is surely the best team in the business. That optimism is what I like about the New England fan. Always a believer, the fan doesnt give up at all. Shrugs his shoulders, has a Sam Adams, a good sleep and starts preparing for the future. A very good attitude to have.
In a way, I have both been a participant as well as an observer of the Red Sox mania through two seasons- one a fascinating come from behind historic victory and now, a tragic loss. But the attitude of the fan has been consistent- a passion to support the team come what may. This may be a wet weekend and the Gods may be mourning as well but I am sure the fan will turn up at Fenway next season just as optimistic and sure about victory as he has been ever in his life. For the rest of the year, Boston would be following football! As for me, I shall continue to see what sites I can surf to follow my own passion for cricket and soccer, two games that are hardly played on this continent. They really don't know what they are missing out on!
The buzz of Friday may be gone, but the optimism remains and thats what is most important.
Sunday, October 02, 2005
The greatest game ever played!
Talk about exaggeration- and the title of this movie epitomises it!
One of the key ways of making sports movies successful is to have an underdog as the main protagonist who basically kills the ego of the champion by beating him at the game; the contrast between the champion and the underdog is stark and the audience roots for the underdog all along.
This movie is different, and refreshingly so in that sense.
The movie traces the parallel lives of the main competitors in the 1913 USOpen, the British professional Harry Vardon (Stephen Dillane) and the American amateur Francis Ouimet (Shia LaBeouf). In spite of their differences in age and nationality, Vardon and Ouimet both came from modest backgrounds, a fact that gives the film a jolt of class consciousness.
Vardon, who grew up poor on the Channel island of Jersey, is treated with condescension by the London establishment and denied membership in the club that sponsors him. Ouimet, the child of immigrants, learns golf while caddying at the country club across the street from his family's house in Brookline. (His own caddy later on is a street urchin named Eddie, played by a natural scene-stealer named Josh Flitter.) Ouimet's father (Elias Koteas), a laborer, sees the game as a waste of time, but Francis's mother (Marnie McPhail) indulges her son's passion and encourages him, as someone in a movie like this must, to follow his dream.
This following of the dream against all odds is what I like most about the movie. Ouimet doesn't just dream, he works hard, reads Vardon's book about what makes a golfer great, and practices and practices till he is able to perfect his game. We also get a glimse of what makes champions great- they have an uncanny ability to concentrate on their goal and cut out all the 'noise' surrounding them. They just concentrate on what they have to do with single minded devotion.
ut of a mov
This is not the greatest sports movie I have seen but it is a very good one- at least worth one watch. Seldom do you get out of a sports movie feeling for both the winner and the loser- the characterization of both Vardon and Ouimet is impeccable and the acting outstanding. Watch it- you will not regret it.
One of the key ways of making sports movies successful is to have an underdog as the main protagonist who basically kills the ego of the champion by beating him at the game; the contrast between the champion and the underdog is stark and the audience roots for the underdog all along.
This movie is different, and refreshingly so in that sense.
The movie traces the parallel lives of the main competitors in the 1913 USOpen, the British professional Harry Vardon (Stephen Dillane) and the American amateur Francis Ouimet (Shia LaBeouf). In spite of their differences in age and nationality, Vardon and Ouimet both came from modest backgrounds, a fact that gives the film a jolt of class consciousness.
Vardon, who grew up poor on the Channel island of Jersey, is treated with condescension by the London establishment and denied membership in the club that sponsors him. Ouimet, the child of immigrants, learns golf while caddying at the country club across the street from his family's house in Brookline. (His own caddy later on is a street urchin named Eddie, played by a natural scene-stealer named Josh Flitter.) Ouimet's father (Elias Koteas), a laborer, sees the game as a waste of time, but Francis's mother (Marnie McPhail) indulges her son's passion and encourages him, as someone in a movie like this must, to follow his dream.
This following of the dream against all odds is what I like most about the movie. Ouimet doesn't just dream, he works hard, reads Vardon's book about what makes a golfer great, and practices and practices till he is able to perfect his game. We also get a glimse of what makes champions great- they have an uncanny ability to concentrate on their goal and cut out all the 'noise' surrounding them. They just concentrate on what they have to do with single minded devotion.
ut of a mov
This is not the greatest sports movie I have seen but it is a very good one- at least worth one watch. Seldom do you get out of a sports movie feeling for both the winner and the loser- the characterization of both Vardon and Ouimet is impeccable and the acting outstanding. Watch it- you will not regret it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)