Tomichan Matheikal's blog

Book Review Salman Rushdie’s new novel, Quichotte , is too clever to entertain, let alone become a classic. There are too many allusions to contemporary politics and (other) entertainments such as movies and the TV. Quite many of them are likely to remain beyond the comprehension of even knowledgeable readers. A few years from now some of these allusions will be plainly obsolete. Who likes to google every other minute while reading a novel? Rushdie’s Quichotte goes cranky from watching TV shows just as his classical namesake, Quixote, goes mad from reading the chivalric romances of his time. Quichotte’s quest is for Selma R, a talk-show star. The feelings and desires in the shrivelled heart of old man Quichotte are stirred by the charming star of Indian origin. Quichotte is the pseudonym of a medical rep of Indian origin who loses his job right when his crazy romance begins. Quichotte is not real. He is the fictional creation of an Indian-born spy novelist who longs to

Fiction The Prime Minister was addressing the nation on the TV when Carlos walked into the Regional Transport Office. “By the year 2024, all duplicate citizens in the country will be deported,” the PM said with his characteristic aplomb and histrionics. “I lost my driving license,” Carlos said to the man at the enquiry counter. “What should I do?” “You need to apply for a duplicate license,” the man helped. “Do you have a copy of your license?” “Not a hard copy,” Carlos said. “I have this.” He showed the digital license he had downloaded in Digilocker on his mobile phone. “You should meet the MVI [Motor Vehicles Inspector] there.” The man pointed to a cubicle where an elderly man was sitting with a pile of papers in front. Carlos showed his digital license and sought assistance. “This is not a valid license,” the man said taking Carlos’s mobile phone and peering at the screen. “Your license was issued in 2017 when the number system was different. How did you get t

Social media is one of the most entertaining places for people like me who don’t know how to deal with real societies. I love going through the comments appended to well-written articles whose links are given in Facebook and Twitter – the only two social medias I’m fairly active at. The comments massacre the very spirit of the article concerned. I wonder whether any of the commenters actually read the articles. How many bhakts, devotees, pilgrims, retreat-goers, or the like, have actually read the scriptures for which they fight tooth and nail on real as well as virtual platforms? Do people read anymore? But, be sure, they write. And they write copiously. Social media is full of copious writers. Does that make it an unsocial place really? I won’t answer that affirmatively. If you restrict your friends’ circles to a few, you get the kind of societies you like. I hope so. But I have accepted friendship requests indiscriminately just because it’s all virtual and I don’t mind

“Why be good if there is no God?” A young man who is familiar with my religious views asked me yesterday. “What has goodness got to do with god?” I asked. “Aren’t you diminishing yourself when you are being good merely for god’s sake?” I explained that goodness is our duty to ourselves as well as the humanity. “When we are good, we create a better world. Creating that better world is our duty.” “Duty given by whom?” The young man persisted. “By our intelligence. Intelligence tells us that good is better than bad for all. For all creatures and the planet and the cosmos.” “Who decides what is good and what is evil?” “We decide. You and I. Goodness promotes the welfare of other creatures. The problem with our gods is that they tend to promote the welfare of particular communities.” “Perhaps certain people misuse the gods for such purposes. Gods themselves cannot be so parochial.” I smiled. “I didn’t understand,” the young man said. “What?” “The meaning of that s

One of the many posters that appeared in my village asking people to support the Church Act In spite of its recent capitulation to the venal central government, the Supreme Court of India has upheld women’s right to enter places of worship like Sabarimala. But certain religious fundamentalists in Kerala are determined not to let women anywhere near the presiding deity on that hilltop. Ayyappan, the deity, is a bachelor whose chastity is so fragile that it will be shattered by the mere presence of worshipping women, according to these fundamentalists.   Umpteen questions can be raised against this and other infantile views of religious fundamentalists. None of the fundamentalist views stands to reason. Yet these views get popular support. One obvious reason is that most believers, not merely the fundamentalists, feel insecure about changing age-old beliefs and customs, however absurd and puerile they may be. It was quite heartening to see the Christians of the state of Ker

The parrot had lived in a cage for a very, very long time. Finally, one day, the master decided to set it free. “Go. The sky is your limit,” said the master as he opened the cage. The parrot was baffled. It didn’t know what to do. The master took the parrot out and liberated it into the air. The parrot flapped its wings and realised it could fly. It flew away. The parrot returned in a while to the cage. “This cage is my country,” it said. “I love my country. My country is the greatest, the best. My county’s culture is very, very ancient. All sciences and arts have their roots in my country.” The master who was a Harvard Business School graduate was happy. He knew how to convert any situation into a new business opportunity. Soon all parrots in the neighbourhood became nationalists that repeated the same slogans.

In Antoine de Saint-Exupery’s classical book, The Little Prince , a fox shares a secret with the eponymous prince in return for a favour from the prince. “And now here is my secret,” says the fox, “a very simple secret: It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye .” The favour that the fox wanted from the prince was to be tamed. “Tame me,” the fox requested. The prince didn’t know what taming was. Taming means “to establish ties,” explains the fox. It is relationships that make any entity unique. There are flowers and flowers, for example. But all those flowers mean nothing to you unless you establish a “tie” with one or more of them. “ It is the time you wasted for your rose that makes your rose so important ,” the fox counsels. The fox doesn’t like the system he has to follow. He has to hunt chickens of human beings, and human beings hunt him. That is the fact. He would like to reinterpret that fact. He would like to create