Saturday, October 10, 2026
The Lansdowne Detour:
Friday, October 02, 2026
The Janissary's Paradox: A chatroom
The Janissary’s Paradox: A Chatroom, a Book and Too Many Lost Souls
I often drop into a chatroom called “Sherlock and You”, a place where people from all corners of the globe gather, ostensibly to discuss literature. Of course, literature is only the excuse. The real attraction is discovering how many different ways human beings can misunderstand the same book.
My chosen group is mostly interested in modern literature. Recently, I was reading The Bastard of Istanbul by Elif Shafak when I came across an intriguing expression: “Janissary’s Paradox.”
Naturally, I did what any innocent reader would do—I mentioned it in the chatroom.
That was my first mistake.
Within minutes, I was attacked by a barrage of questions, explanations, personal histories, childhood memories and, occasionally, complaints about European weather.
The Janissaries, I explained, were the elite soldiers of the Ottoman Empire. Many were taken as Christian boys, converted, trained and transformed into the Sultan's most loyal soldiers. There was something deeply paradoxical about the arrangement: the empire took children from their original communities, erased much of their inherited identity, gave them a new identity—and then depended on them to defend the very system that had transformed them.
The more I explained, the more I realised that this was not merely an Ottoman historical curiosity.
It was happening all around me.
Helen the Lost, who introduced herself as being from Paris, was the first to arrive.
“I am from Congo,” she announced. “But in France I had to learn French, behave French, think French. Slowly I began wondering—where did the Congolese Helen disappear?”
Then came an Arab gentleman living in Germany.
“I can manage German bureaucracy,” he declared, “but I cannot manage German winter.”
That apparently was his own version of the Janissary Paradox.
Then Bloefeld appeared—the notorious Bond villain, at least according to his chosen identity. He maintained that he had no identity problem whatsoever.
“I have several identities,” he said. “That is much more efficient.”
Lothar from Romania disagreed. He called himself “Lost in the Wild.” He had lived in three countries, spoken four languages and was still trying to decide which country had the correct version of himself.
Lotus from Arizona was even more complicated. She said she had migrated so long ago that she could no longer remember whether she was nostalgic for the country she had left or for the person she had been when she left it.
The Unmindful Philosopher from Dubai then entered the conversation.
“Identity,” he announced, “is merely an attachment of the ego.”
We waited.
After five minutes he added:
“Except when my passport expires.”
That brought the discussion firmly back to earth.
From Istanbul to America—and then to the chatroom
In Shafak's novel, the paradox is particularly poignant in the context of Armenians in America: people carrying the memory of a homeland, sometimes inherited through generations, while simultaneously becoming part of a completely different society.
And suddenly our little literary discussion had become an unofficial conference on the global diaspora.
People who had crossed borders for opportunity, safety, marriage, education, war, economics or simply curiosity began telling their stories.
Some had become completely assimilated.
Some fiercely preserved their old identity.
Some lived somewhere in between—a cultural no-man's-land where the food remained authentic, the language became rusty and the grandchildren answered in English.
And then there were those who had developed a fascinating third identity.
They were no longer entirely from there, but they were never completely from here either.
That, I began to understand, is perhaps the real Janissary's Paradox.
The first generation says, “We must not forget where we came from.”
The second generation says, “Why should I be different from everyone else?”
The third generation suddenly asks, “What exactly did my grandparents lose?”
And somewhere between generations, identity becomes a family heirloom nobody knows how to use.
The diaspora paradox
The modern world has produced millions of Janissaries—not literally, of course, but psychologically.
Migration often requires adaptation. You learn the language, change your habits, understand the local customs, acquire a new passport and gradually learn how to laugh at jokes you didn't understand ten years ago.
But adaptation has a price.
At what point does adaptation become erasure?
And at what point does preserving one's original identity become a refusal to belong?
That was the question our chatroom could not settle.
The Pakistani in London complained that his children knew more about Premier League football than cricket.
The Bengali in New York complained that his daughter spoke Bengali only when she wanted money.
The Indian in Toronto complained about snow.
The Indian in California complained about taxes.
The Frenchman complained about Americans.
The Americans complained about the French.
At this point Sherlock himself might have closed the chatroom.
Yet beneath all the humour was something rather serious.
The diaspora is not simply a geographical phenomenon. It is an internal negotiation.
You carry one culture in your memory and acquire another through everyday life. You may speak one language at home and another outside. You may eat the food of your childhood while listening to music from your adopted country. You may celebrate festivals whose original meaning has become blurred but whose emotional significance has increased.
And sometimes you discover that the homeland you are defending exists mainly in your imagination.
The final irony
By midnight, the chatroom had become unusually quiet.
Helen the Lost was still there.
So was Bloefeld.
Lothar had disappeared into the wild.
Lotus was probably somewhere in Arizona wondering who she really was.
The Unmindful Philosopher had gone offline after declaring that identity was an illusion.
I closed The Bastard of Istanbul and thought about the Janissaries.
Perhaps the greatest paradox is not that people can lose their original identity.
It is that after losing it, they may spend the rest of their lives desperately trying to reconstruct it.
And perhaps that is why a simple phrase in a Turkish novel produced such an extraordinary reaction in a chatroom full of strangers.
I had thought I was discussing history.
They thought I was discussing them.
And somewhere between Istanbul, Paris, Congo, Germany, Romania, Arizona and Dubai, I realised that the Janissary's Paradox was no longer an Ottoman story.
It had become a global one.
Friday, September 25, 2026
Two Reds,Two Roads
Two Reds, Two Roads: How Kerala and Bengal Found Their Way to Communism
I have been reading Shashi Tharoor’s India: From Midnight to Millennium, and one passage suddenly made me stop and think.
Tharoor recalls his childhood at his maternal home in a village deep in Kerala. He was born into an upper-caste family and, as a child, discovered a rather strange village rule: he simply could not play with children belonging to lower castes.
Now imagine being a child and being told:
“You can play with him—but not with him.”
Naturally, the child asks, “Why?”
And the answer is, “Because he belongs to that caste.”
The child might reasonably ask the next question: “What is a caste?”
That, I suspect, was the beginning of many Indians' lifelong education in the subject!
What struck me was that I could not remember anything quite like that from my own childhood visits to remote villages in Bengal. I certainly knew that caste existed, but I don't remember those invisible walls, prescribed distances or the sense that one human being had to physically keep away from another because of birth.
That difference stayed in my head.
Both Kerala and Bengal became great strongholds of communism. Both produced powerful Communist movements and long periods of Left political rule. Yet the social worlds from which their communism emerged were remarkably different.
So I started digging around—with a little help from AI research, which nowadays is always ready to join an old man's argument—and discovered that the two stories are almost mirror images.
Same red flag. Different road to the red flag.
Kerala: When Caste and Class Sat Down Together
Pre-independence Kerala had one of the most rigid caste systems in India.
And this was not merely the familiar Indian arrangement of “You sit there, I'll sit here.”
Kerala had something much more elaborate.
Swami Vivekananda, travelling through Kerala in the 1890s, was so struck by the extraordinary rigidity of the caste system that he famously described the region as a “lunatic asylum” of caste.
It was a deliberately shocking expression, but he was reacting to a society where caste governed not merely marriage, occupation and social status, but even everyday physical movement and human contact.
Distance itself could become a caste rule.
A Pulaya, for example, was traditionally required to remain at a considerable physical distance from a Namboodiri Brahmin. The often-cited figure is 72 steps.
Seventy-two steps!
Today, if somebody tells me to maintain a distance of 72 steps, I assume either he is very angry with me or he has discovered a new Covid variant.
But in traditional Kerala, this was part of the social order.
Lower-caste people could be prevented from entering temples, using certain roads or observing ordinary social customs that upper castes took for granted. In some communities, even covering the upper body was restricted.
And here the story becomes important.
The social hierarchy was closely connected with the ownership and control of land.
The jenmi system gave enormous power to large landholders, particularly Namboodiri Brahmins, with Nairs and other groups also occupying important positions in the landholding structure. Below them were tenants and agricultural labourers, including Ezhavas, Thiyyas, Pulayas, Cherumas and others.
So if you were born at the wrong end of the social ladder, life could deliver a double punch.
You were poor.
And you were considered socially inferior.
The person who owned the land could also belong to the social group that considered you untouchable.
That is a rather combustible combination.
And perhaps this is what makes Tharoor's childhood recollection so striking. He was not describing some dusty historical chapter from a school textbook. He was remembering, as a child, being told that certain children were simply not his playmates because of caste.
A child naturally asks:
“But why?”
And society answers:
“Because that is the way things are.”
Which is precisely when society should become nervous.
Because sooner or later somebody is going to ask:
“But who decided that?”
Then Came the Social Reformers
Kerala did not suddenly wake up one morning and discover Karl Marx hiding behind a coconut tree.
The groundwork had already been laid by powerful social reformers.
Sree Narayana Guru challenged caste hierarchy and preached the dignity and equality of human beings. Ayyankali organised among oppressed agricultural communities and fought for education and social rights. Chattampi Swamikal questioned the intellectual foundations of Brahminical dominance.
So before Kerala became politically red, it had already begun questioning why society was arranged in such a peculiar fashion.
Then came the Communists.
Leaders such as P. Krishna Pillai, A. K. Gopalan and E. M. S. Namboodiripad found a society in which grievances were already deep, organised and increasingly political.
The Communist movement did not have to manufacture the anger.
The raw material was already lying around in abundance.
The Kayyur uprising of 1940, the Punnapra–Vayalar uprising of 1946 and the numerous agrarian struggles in Malabar reflected an explosive mixture of land, tenancy, caste and political mobilisation.
And this is where Kerala's story becomes distinctive.
Communism could present itself not merely as an economic argument about wages and land.
It could also be understood by many of its supporters as the next stage of a much older struggle for dignity.
The red flag arrived at a door where people had already been asking why the door was closed in the first place.
And Then I Come to Bengal
Now Bengal.
Here the story becomes rather different.
When I think of my own childhood visits to villages in Bengal, I certainly cannot claim that caste did not exist. Of course it did. Bengal had—and has—its own complicated caste hierarchy and discrimination.
But the atmosphere was different.
I don't remember that strange Kerala-style combination where caste identity and control over land appeared to sit on the same chair.
And there is a historical reason.
The Permanent Settlement of 1793 transformed Bengal's landholding structure. Zamindari rights became transferable and could effectively be bought and sold. Estates changed hands, sometimes quite dramatically.
As a result, Bengal's zamindars did not belong to one single caste.
There were Kayastha zamindars, Sadgop, Mahishya, Aguri and other Hindu landholders, Muslim landowners and merchant families who accumulated estates.
So the Bengali Brahmin was not automatically the great village landlord sitting on top of everybody else.
Quite often he was doing something much less glamorous.
He was the village tolpandit trying to keep a Sanskrit school alive.
Or the impoverished pujari waiting for his next handful of rice.
Or the schoolmaster who seemed to have been permanently appointed to poverty.
Sarat Chandra's world is full of such people.
So is Bibhutibhushan's.
The Bengali Brahmin could quite easily be poor.
Sometimes, I suspect, the poor Brahmin and the poor peasant had more in common economically than either would have liked to admit.
The Bengali Village Had Another Villain
If Kerala had its jenmi, Bengal had the jotedar.
The jotedar was often a substantial local cultivator or landholder. He could own considerable acreage, lend grain or money, and have land cultivated by bargadars, the sharecroppers.
And the interesting thing was that the jotedar did not have to belong to one particular caste.
He could be Muslim in Murshidabad.
Rajbanshi in North Bengal.
Mahishya in Midnapore.
Or belong to another local community altogether.
So the conflict increasingly became one of who owned the land and who worked it, rather than simply which caste you were born into.
That distinction matters.
The Bengali Communist movement therefore found an enormous political opening in the economic relationship between landlord, jotedar and sharecropper.
And then came Tebhaga.
Tebhaga: Two-Thirds, Please
In 1946–47, Bengal's sharecroppers demanded two-thirds of the crop instead of the traditional half.
The argument was wonderfully simple.
“If I am doing the cultivating, why shouldn't I get a larger share?”
It was not exactly a doctoral thesis in political philosophy.
It was the farmer looking at the harvested paddy and saying, essentially:
“Brother, let us discuss the arithmetic.”
The Tebhaga movement became one of the great agrarian struggles of Bengal, and Communist organisers played a major role in it.
Here the central question was not primarily whether one man could walk on a particular road because of his caste.
It was:
Who gets the crop?
And behind that:
Who owns the land?
Then History Threw Partition at Bengal
Just when Bengal was already dealing with enormous political and economic tensions, Partition arrived in 1947.
Millions of people were displaced from East Pakistan.
Many arrived in West Bengal with practically nothing.
If you have ever seen Sealdah station at a busy hour, imagine it with an entire population arriving without a house to go to.
Refugee colonies sprang up around places such as Jadavpur, Dum Dum, Sodepur and Howrah.
People occupied land.
They built huts.
They formed colony committees.
They demanded rehabilitation.
They searched for employment.
And gradually many entered the industrial workforce, including the jute mills and other factories.
Here again the Communist movement found fertile ground.
The party organised among refugees, workers and the urban poor. It became involved in the food movements of 1959 and 1966 and built powerful trade-union networks.
So Bengal's Left politics acquired another powerful memory.
Not the forbidden temple road.
Not the 72-step distance.
But the refugee train.
The crowded platform.
The squatter colony.
The struggle to find a piece of land and a way of earning a living.
Two Reds, Two Memories
And suddenly the difference I had noticed between Tharoor's Kerala childhood and my own Bengal memories began to make sense.
Kerala's journey to communism was deeply connected with a society where caste humiliation and economic exploitation could reinforce each other.
Bengal's journey was more strongly shaped by land relations, sharecropping, economic inequality, industrial labour and the enormous disruption of Partition.
Of course, neither story is completely pure.
Kerala had class conflicts that were not reducible to caste.
Bengal had caste discrimination that cannot simply be wished away.
And Bengal's Communist movement was certainly not only a refugee movement, just as Kerala's communism was not merely an anti-caste movement.
History is rarely polite enough to stay inside our neat little boxes.
But the difference in emphasis is important.
In Kerala, the memory of oppression could be something as intimate as being told:
“You cannot play with that child.”
In Bengal, the political memory could just as easily be:
“You have cultivated this land. Why are you getting only half the crop?”
Or, after Partition:
“We have arrived. Now where are we going to live?”
Same red flag.
Different childhood memories.
Different grievances.
Different roads.
And perhaps that is why two states that eventually became among India's strongest centres of Communist politics could nevertheless have such different social histories underneath that red colour.
In Kerala, the road to the red flag passed through the temple road that some were not allowed to walk on.
In Bengal, it passed through the paddy field, the jotedar's ledger, the sharecropper's demand—and eventually Sealdah station crowded with refugees who had lost almost everything.
In the end, both stories return to one deceptively simple question:
Who owns the land, who works it, and who gets to belong there?
Perhaps Marx would have approved.
And the Bengali grandmother, looking at the harvest, would probably have approved even more—provided somebody remembered to bring the fish curry to the table.
Saturday, September 19, 2026
From the skies over Kalaikunda in ’65 to a Christmas table in Australia decades later — remembering Flight Lieutenant Alfred Tyrone Cooke, VrC. A true Bull who flew with nerve, humour, and heart. Rest easy, Sir.
Friday, September 18, 2026
The Morning Walk Ambush
Saturday, September 12, 2026
The Night the Ambulance Left Deucha
Saturday, September 05, 2026
An Eid Afternoon With Two Million Ghosts
Friday, August 28, 2026
The Great Indian School Hunt
The Great Indian School Hunt: A Father, a Son and Eight Schools
There is a great deal of discussion these days about the condition of government schools in India. Before I join the chorus, let me make one thing clear: I myself am a product of a government-aided school in Delhi.
It was certainly not a modern school by today's standards. No smart classrooms, no air-conditioned laboratories, no fancy gadgets—probably not even a smartboard in anyone's wildest imagination! But the teachers were sincere. They came to school, taught their subjects and, most importantly, did their job faithfully.
And somehow, I survived the system and eventually passed out of IIT Kharagpur!
My son Anish had a rather more adventurous education. Because of my transferable job in BHEL and my involvement in power-station project execution, he changed schools eight times!
You could say he had a pan-India education without ever applying for admission to a pan-India school.
The first stop — Singrauli
After completing Kindergarten at St. Cathedral in Delhi, I was transferred to Singrauli Super Thermal Power Station. I put Anish in St. Joseph's School in the township.
During admission, the principal, a padre, interviewed Anish in English. Fortunately, the boy could answer him reasonably well.
Then came another father with his son. The principal asked him what he did.
The man proudly replied that he was a shovel operator in the coal mines adjoining the power plant.
The principal then asked, "Do you speak English at home?"
The gentleman replied, rather proudly, "Na ji, na."
I liked that school immediately. Here was a school where the son of a shovel operator could aspire to study alongside the children of engineers and officers. The father could afford the fees and, more importantly, he wanted his son to get a good education.
Anish studied there till Class II.
Back to Delhi — and the Bengali problem
Then came another transfer to Delhi.
My first choice was Kendriya Vidyalaya. No admission.
I tried another English-medium school near the Western Extension Area. Again, no admission.
By then I had taken a small flat in West Patel Nagar, close to my parents, who were living in WEA after my father had retired and had to vacate the government accommodation at Wilson Square, Gole Market.
I had run out of options.
So I did something that every Indian father understands perfectly well.
I used my influence!
I approached my old school, Raisina Bengali Higher Secondary School at Gole Market. The principal, a former Army man, kindly agreed to admit Anish.
There was, however, one small problem.
Anish didn't know Bengali.
The principal looked at me and said, "He will have to learn Bengali during the summer vacation because he will be entering Class IV."
Luckily, Mrs Gupta, who had taught me years earlier, was still living near our house. I approached her.
"Madam, I have a small problem."
She probably knew what was coming.
She agreed to teach Anish Bengali.
And somehow Anish sailed from Class III into Class IV and even managed to pass Bengali!
My son was now becoming a linguist by force rather than by choice.
Wanakbori — the English-medium school
I stayed in Delhi for about a year and was then transferred to Wanakbori in Gujarat in 1985.
There was an English-medium school at Shivalia where most of the children of my BHEL colleagues studied. I took Anish there.
The infrastructure looked good. But I had one doubt.
I discovered that many of the teachers were wives of my BHEL colleagues.
The principal sensed my hesitation.
He called a boy.
"This is Indranil. You can speak to him in English."
Indranil spoke excellent English. Smart boy, confident, fluent.
I was impressed.
Admission done!
Later I discovered that there were about twenty students in the class, but only five had literate parents. The rest were children of labourers.
Then I became friendly with Mr Purkayastha, the project manager of the coal-handling plant supplied by MAMC. One day we visited his quarter.
And there was Indranil!
I told his wife about my impressive encounter with Indranil during admission.
She burst out laughing.
"The principal does that with every new parent!"
It turned out that Indranil had arrived in Wanakbori only a year earlier and had learnt English in his previous school.
So much for my scientific assessment of the school's English standard!
I also became uncomfortable because most of the teachers were wives of my junior colleagues. I felt they might be giving Anish marks with a little extra generosity.
A father's suspicion is sometimes more powerful than an examination result.
Baroda — boarding school at last
I decided to look for a better school in Baroda.
I visited Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan. They had a hostel, and the principal understood my predicament. He admitted Anish directly to the next class.
For the next two years, Anish stayed in the hostel.
It was a massive school and, in my opinion, one of the best in Baroda at that time. There were four football fields, and playing after lunch was compulsory.
Now that was education!
Anish made friends with children of well-known artists and businessmen. Life in the hostel gave him a completely different exposure.
But something else happened there which, at the time, seemed like a minor matter.
The computer arrives quietly
In 1986, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan started an additional computer class for students who were interested. It was not part of the regular curriculum and required an extra fee.
I paid the fee and put Anish into the class.
That was the beginning of his tryst with computers.
During our Vizag days, I continued this by making him attend the summer computer classes conducted by APTECH.
So, while I was busy running around looking for schools, admission, languages and suitable teachers, his computer skills were quietly being sharpened in the background.
The irony is that I had absolutely no idea what was coming!
This was the mid-1980s. The IT revolution was still largely invisible to people like me. Computers were simply something interesting and useful for a child to learn.
I certainly did not imagine that computers would transform the world by the late 1990s and beyond.
So, quite unknowingly, I had put Anish on a road that would eventually become his career.
Vizag — three languages strike again!
In 1988, I was transferred from BHEL to Vizag Steel Plant.
Naturally, the school hunt started all over again.
I first took Anish to DAV School at Ukkunagaram, the township of Vizag Steel Plant.
At the same time, I was trying to get him into Kendriya Vidyalaya.
After some effort—and, I confess, with the help of the CMD of the Steel Plant—I managed to get him admitted to KV.
But the famous three-language formula now entered our lives.
Anish was comfortable with English and Hindi. The third language had to be either Telugu or Sanskrit.
I decided that Sanskrit was the lesser of the two evils.
Then came the next question:
Who would teach him Sanskrit?
I could teach him most subjects, but the Sanskrit I had studied at school was hardly enough to prepare him for his class.
Fortunately, my neighbour Mr Bandopadhyay came to the rescue. His father had been a Sanskrit pandit.
And so Anish's education continued—with a rotating cast of English teachers, Bengali teachers, Sanskrit teachers, hostel wardens and, of course, his permanently available father-tutor!
Farakka — finally, some stability
In December 1991, I was transferred to Farakka, just when Anish was preparing for his Class X Board examination.
Luckily, Farakka had a Kendriya Vidyalaya.
He joined there, completed his schooling and finally passed both his Class X Board examination and Higher Secondary.
At last! No more school hunting.
I think I was more relieved than he was.
And the computer class turned out to matter
Looking back now, the most interesting part of this whole story is perhaps the little computer class I put him into in Baroda.
At the time, I was simply trying to expose him to something new. Then came the APTECH summer classes in Vizag.
I had no grand plan.
I had no crystal ball.
I had no idea that the IT industry was going to explode.
But the foundation was being laid quietly.
Today, that little boy who went through eight schools, several cities, different curricula and multiple languages is a successful IT engineer in Australia. He went on to complete his Master's degree in Information Technology from Griffith University and built his career in the IT field.
Looking back, I sometimes feel that while I was busy changing his schools, the computer was quietly changing his future!
So where is the real problem?
That is why the current debate about government schools interests me.
The problem is not simply government school versus private school.
A good school ultimately depends on good teachers, committed management and an environment where children are encouraged to learn.
My own government-aided school in Delhi did not have fancy infrastructure, but we had teachers who took their responsibility seriously.
And my experience with Anish taught me another lesson.
Education is not merely a building, an English-medium label, smart classrooms or high marks.
It is about giving a child a strong foundation and the confidence to face the next environment.
Anish had to adjust every time we moved.
Just when he made friends, another transfer came. Just when he became comfortable with a teacher, we moved. One school taught Bengali, another expected Telugu or Sanskrit. One school had a hostel, another was in a power-station township. One curriculum differed from another.
Yet children are remarkably adaptable. Perhaps much more adaptable than their parents.
I had the advantage of being an engineer, having a transferable job and knowing people in different places. I could run from pillar to post, persuade principals, find tutors and occasionally even use a little "influence."
But what about an ordinary parent who has none of these?
That is where our education system needs to think harder.
Because if a reasonably educated father like me had to struggle so much to provide continuity of basic education to his son, imagine the struggle of a parent who has neither the information nor the connections nor the money to manoeuvre through the system.
And perhaps this is the part of the government-school debate we sometimes miss.
We should not judge education only by buildings and facilities. We should ask whether the teacher is sincere, whether the child is learning, whether he is being encouraged to think—and whether the system gives every child a fair chance.
My own journey from a government-aided school to IIT taught me that.
Anish's journey through eight schools taught me something else: a child's education is sometimes less about the school he attends and more about the opportunities he encounters along the way.
And finally, there is one more lesson.
Sometimes parents think they are carefully designing their children's future.
In reality, we often just open a few doors and hope they walk through the right one.
In 1986, I paid an extra fee for a computer class without having the faintest idea where computers would take us.
Life, as usual, knew better than I did. 😄
And perhaps Anish deserves a special certificate:
"Successfully completed schooling after surviving eight schools, several cities, multiple curricula, three languages, one overenthusiastic engineer-father—and one accidental introduction to the IT revolution."
I wonder whether any university offers a degree for that! 😄
