Radha-Krishna and the irony

Few days back, I received a wedding invitation of one of my friends. Naturally I was very excited about my friend getting married but as i started reading the card, I was little perplexed. This card had a beautiful picture of Radha-Krishna painted on it and seek their blessings for the couple. Yes, I know that Radha-Krishna are considered epitome of love but I found their picture on the wedding card quite ironic as their love existed outside the wed-lock and broke the conventional rules of  society.

This immortal love story began during adolescence years of Krishna. Young Krishna or Kahna, name by which he is fondly called, used to take his cows for grazing near lake in Gokul. There he would play his flute. The music from his flute was so beautiful and mesmerizing that all the Gopis or cow-girls, would leave what-ever work they were doing and dance around him. All the Gopis yearned for Kahna but Kahna yearned for a special Gopi - Radha. But like all great love stories there was a problem- Radha was married. This problem was further elevated by the fact that she was married to Ryana, who was brother of Yosoda [Krishna's foster mother], hence making Radha, Krishna's Mami. So not only was this love illicit and adulterous but perhaps of highest order. But then the feeling of love was so intense that they didn't care about the society and their reputation. Every night Radha used to slip out of her house in secret to meet her Kahna on the banks of Yamuna. There in flowery meadows, Kahna would play his flute and Radha would dance to it. Their love was unbound by law, custom or conventions.

Their love is not easy to fathom or accommodate using our conventional morality. The fact that Krishna is considered God, makes it even more fascinating and intriguing. Now even if one's sense of morality tells them that this is adulterous and illicit relationship, just the fact that adultery was committed by God causes dissonance. There are lots of interesting ways in which people have tried to resolve this dissonance over centuries.

Moralists who find extra-marital affair too scandalous have added few back stories to this narrative like in Goloka, Radha was cursed by Dama, Krishna's friend, that she will be separated from Krishna for one hundred years when they come to earth.Or in another story Radha and Krishna were married secretly by Brahma when they were kids.

Liberal Romantics argues that illicit love is superior to married love as it is given freely and have no legal claims and is thus selfless.Married love on the contrary functions according to rights and obligations in which both partners have specific expectations of each other. It is hence limited by this sense of duty which husband and wife naturally acquire towards one another. They argue that love at the highest and purest form is so profound that it requires no sense of duty and flows absolutely spontaneously not caring about anything. Radha loved Krishna in spite of everything, not because she had an obligation to him.

 Some see Radha's love for Krishna as a metaphor which represents our unrequited longings which are suppressed by society. Social norms compels us to behave in a particular way and prevent us from being spontaneous and true to our inner spirit. Every night Radha and Krishna's reunion and rejoicing on the banks of Yamuna ,acknowledges this human condition.

The beauty of this great love story is that it gives everybody a choice of how they want to view this relationship. It says nothing about the relationship but more about our attitude towards life and society.

Yun hota toh kya hota? what if?

 How many times we wonder - Yun hota toh kya hota? i.e what if? How many times we become harsh on ourselves for not making right choices. We blame fate, destiny and our ignorance. We fail to understand that any information is incomplete and is distorted by prejudices. In spite of this, one has to make decisions all the time and hope that results are in our favour. Unfortunately, Life can only be understood backwards, but it must be lived forwards.

 Decisions are good or bad only in hindsight. Decision are more often than not rationalized in hindsight. Future is uncertain and uncertainty is scary. We all love the idea of pre-concieved plans, but often forgets that most stories are made coherent by connecting the dots backwards. If we read about any success story which is told sincerely, we'll identify that to what extent was it influenced by luck and how things just fell in place. Nobody goes out with a plan to build a Microsoft, Google or a Facebook. Mere smartness doesn’t guarantee success.

Besides ones knowledge, skills, experience and other talents, a lot depends on variables, be it people, place, time, to which, perhaps you have some or no control of. Gita also emphasizes on the Karma and not the result. Achievements and outcomes are not in ones hand, only the action is. According to Gita, Gyan Yogi doesn’t blame anyone for his situation. He knows, that his fortune/misfortune is dependant on many factors, not all of which are in his control. He simply takes charge of what situation he is in and focuses on what he can do, never letting anxiety of failure pull him back or confidence of success making him arrogant. He realizes that one must act and take corrective measures based on information in hand.

Mystery called Love

What is love? We've been obsessed with this question for centuries, but despite that it still overwhelms us. The mere utterance of this four letter word conjures very strong emotions in us. Poets, writers,thinkers, philosophers,scientists,all have in there own ways, tried to decipher this great mystery.We have songs, poems, movies, novels, paintings, myths, legends on it.There are as many notions of love, as there are people alive to have them.

All our lives we search for someone to love. Someone who completes us. Someone whose sheer presence sparks happiness in us. Someone with whom, we can share our lives. We all have deep desires to find love. It projects our deepest longings and profound desires. Love is ubiquitous but still we find it hard to define. Everyone have some fuzzy notion about it.

Is love a feeling? A feelings of euphoria, high energy, sleeplessness and a constant craving for ones beloved. A feeling one has experienced, never before. But feelings are dynamic,they keep on changing.At certain time one feels deep affection for some person and at the other one might feels indifference for the same person. So clearly there is more to love, than this feeling of euphoria.

So is love a physiological craving then?An addiction to ones presence.An addiction which lights certain chemical centres in our brain like a narcotic addiction. Don't get me wrong, but evidence shows that the part of brain which lights up under cocaine intoxication and romantic love is same. But then why do this addiction wears out over time?

Well life is a product of evolution and so is love. It is natures way of perpetuating our species. To achieve that it has developed these reward systems in our brains. Once its job is done, it slowly wears out. According to scientific studies this period lasts between 6 months to 2 years. After that disillusionment sets in, emotions relax and imperfections and flaws appears. This sounds very pessimistic,right? Should we then succumb to natures trap and digest the fact that love comes with a shelf-life, if ones lucky 2 years. Make most of it. Enjoy the euphoria and then for rest of live in a loveless relationship.So are we just "biochemical puppets"?

Aristotle and other philosophers have recognized long ago, that our capacity for reason makes us so interesting. If we miss this, we miss almost everything that matters. Yes, it is true that intelligence gets hijacked by chemistry and hormones.But one can reign these natural urges through deliberation, thought and reason.To me love comes across as a conscious decision. It is a commitment one makes to stay together through thick and thin. Chemistry can bring us close, but before it runs out one must figure out conscious ways through reasoning which looks beyond chemistry. If you want to be with somebody then you have to give some part of yourself to accommodate them. You need to accept their imperfections, understand the differences and create space to accommodate them. We are loosing the profoundness of being together with each other in the name of freedom of choice. It is becoming all about ourselves. One must realize that love is giving at expense of self. Its about making each other better person.

In a relationship, if both people think about other,then it becomes a beautiful place to be in. If one thinks this way, its exploitation. If both don't think this way then it becomes compulsion. So what is the kind of relationship, you aspire to be in?

Mature love is a choice, make one, it'll make your life beautiful :)

Save our Deep waters :- An Inconvenient Truth about health of our Oceans

In 2012, I went on a trip to Thailand. I got exposed to the breathtaking beauty of the oceans. The vibrant colour of fishes and corals blew my mind. I went for a certification course in scuba diving to cherish more of this surreal beauty which nature has to offer. My experience with diving in the open oceans broke lots of myth which i had about large sea predators like sharks. I had a notion which most of us have, that sharks are sea monsters who attacks humans.But when i first saw sharks in the open waters during my dives at Andaman, I got under awe of these beautiful, majestic and innocuous animals. Media has created all these myths around sharks and shark attacks. I started reading more about ocean life and was appalled by what I learned.

According to the research published in scientific journal Nature, only 10 percent of all large fish are left in oceans since 1950s [post onset of industrialized fisheries]. We are emptying the oceans at a fast pace, especially large predators like sharks, whales, blue tuna. Killing large predators have unknown global consequences as it would bring about a complete re-organization of ocean ecosystem.In past too we have seen the consequences of playing around with the food-web.The example below from China will summaries everything.

'Mao Zedong blamed rats, flies, mosquitoes and sparrows for the failure of the 1957 grain harvest.Mao ordered the massacre of 1.96 billion sparrows between March and November 1958, despite the objection of experts that sparrows were in fact the major defence of the grain fields against insects.The killing culminated on December 13, 1958, when Shanghai residents reportedly destroyed 194,432 sparrows.

Like the sparrow extermination order issued by a Prussian ruler in the late 18th century, Mao's sparrow-killing campaign had two serious consequences. First, insects destroyed more of the grain harvest than ever in 1959. Second, a generation of the Chinese youth internalized violence against the weak and defenceless as an acceptable behaviour in the name of serving the interest of "the people."The policy-induced famine of 1960-1962 killed 40 million Chinese.'

Similar effects can be triggered by killing sharks who sits at the top of food web and controls Eco-system. Sharks have survived for 450 million years, but may be gone within the next decades. Life within the oceans, covering 2/3rds of our planet, has enjoyed a relationship with sharks for about 450 million years.

I am not against fishing or consuming fishes as food. It is main source of protein in many countries. But the kind of fishing we are practising is unsustainable. And what is more surprising is that we all are in massive denial and don't quite understand that how close some of these species are to extinction. Not only are the oceans source of food but 50-70% of the oxygen on this planet comes from Oceans.

I want the sharks and whales to be there in the oceans when i take my 12 year old kid for diving. We still have a small window of opportunity to save our oceans. Please spread the awareness around.

Cinema is very powerful medium at generating empathy and communicating messages which mere words can't express. Here is the list of three important, informative and revealing documentary films around the topic of Ocean conservation and aquatic animals.

Sharkwater :- It is a beautiful and important Eco-documentary. It destroys lots of the myths created around sharks by media. We kill millions of sharks each year, while only 5 humans gets killed by "so-called" shark attacks. After watching this compelling documentary one will realize, who really is the victim. Stewart's documentary is an attempt in the quest to raise international awareness about a situation that is threatening to put sharks on the endangered list.
Link to these movies:-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBoNi_fLFlg&feature=share


The Cove :- It is a heartbreaking documentary about the captive dolphins exploited in oceanariums like Sea World and there mass slaughter at the cove in Taiji, Japan. The remorse of Richard O'Barry will move any soul. The scene where he narrates an instance of dolphin committing suicide out of depression in his hands, will bring tears in your eyes. This film includes many insights into the mistreatment of dolphins. It also brings our attention to the whaling practise which is still carried out in Japan under the gambit of culture and national identity. This movie was awarded academy award for best documentary in 2010.
Link to documentary :-
http://vimeo.com/88724551

Blackfish :- It is a heartbreaking examination of the maltreatment of large mammals like killer whales at Oceaniurms such as SeaWorld in the name of entertainment.Through interviews with the trainers and whale experts, it highlights inhumane practises where a deeply social creature like Orca is separated from its family and are kept in solitary confinement in woefully cramped enclosures. It tells how killer whales (along with countless other creatures) are stolen from their natural habitats,so that we can pay to watch them perform unnatural tricks for our cameras, and the owners can watch their bank accounts swell. Captivity of these large mammals is dangerous to the trainers and more importantly to the animal. If we really wanna watch these magnificent animals than we should go and watch them in the wild, the place they belong.
Link to documentary :- http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1vhr85_blackfish_shortfilms

Sabse bada rog, kya kahege log - The disease to please

A couple wants to have an austere marriage but still they have to invite new found relatives revealed while preparing the guest list, thinking _____ ?

A Parent may be more than happy to marry their child to partner of their choice in an inter-caste marriage but hesitates, thinking _____?

A middle aged man wants to learn how to dance. But hesitates, thinking ____?

A wife is regularly abused by her husband and wants to walk out of this humiliation but can't because _____?

Parents are worried about their over aged unmarried children, thinking ____ ?

Most of us, in innumerable situations have abstained from doing what our heart desires, thinking “Log kya kahege” (What will people say)? Most of us are obsessed with seeking approval of others and are always worried about what would people say (The Log Kya Kahege syndrome - The Disease to Please ). We are all encompassed by this societal pressure in most aspects. All our complications in life when analyzed, stem from this single fear.

But why shouldn't we bother about what people think/ say. After all, we are social animals and it is in our very nature to seek approval from others for our deeds. Social conformity is the force binding society and we all know the merits of society, so it'll be stupid to argue and say “Damn society. I'll do how I please." We are part of society and fear of rejection and being frowned upon by society is a very rational fear. Public opinion matters and rightly so. But then what about free will? When should personnel happiness precede over public opinion and social approval? When should one show the gut to not succumb to this pressure. When questions like these questions starts worrying me, i am reminded of a folk tale which i read long back in Panchatantra.

  A Father and son were coming back from market after buying a donkey. Father preferred to walk, so he asked his son to sit on Donkey. As they were walking, they passed a group of men, one of whom said- “Look at that lazy youngster, he lets his father walk while he rides”. Son was embarrassed by these comments, so decided to switch places with his father. Now father rode donkey and son started walking alongside donkey. Soon they passed another group of bystanders. One Woman exclaimed -” Shame on that lazy man to let his poor little son trudge along in this scorching hot day.” These comments made father upset, so he asked his son to sit along with him on the donkey. As they both rode little further, they passed another group of people. Now one bystander pointed out to the father and said - “ Aren't you ashamed of yourself and your hulking son, you have no consideration for this poor mute animal. Cruel merciless scoundrels you are”. Man and son felt very humiliated and decided that only way to avoid this criticism is that they both walk alongside donkey. But as they moved little further, they heard loud laughter’s. “Look at these fools. They have a donkey but none of them is riding on it. Never seen such stupid idiots."

Whatever the father and son did, they were always criticized and made fun of.

Public opinion is very fragile as it is guided by their limited view. Whatever one do, people will always talk. In the constant desire to seek others approvals, one often forgets to listen to their inner voice. Seeking approval of one's conscience and acting in accordance with it, should be most important. I think our mantra should be - “Suno sabki karo apne mann ki” i.e. Listen to everybody but do what your conscience says is correct.

Why are few people more luckier than others?

For a long time, I have been wondering why some people are consistently lucky whilst others encounter little or no luck. Is luck some magical force or just the result of random chance? Are few people born under lucky stars or are our thoughts and behaviour responsible for much of the fortune?

People have long recognized the ability of fortune in transforming lives. They have always been searching for an effective way of improving the good fortune in their lives. Lucky charms, amulets, and talismans have been found virtually in all civilizations throughout the recorded history. Our obsession with astrology, numerology, Zodiac, Vastu have all been an exercise to enhance the good fortune in our lives.Superstition is the manifestation of this obsession. It represents people’s attempts to control and enhance this most elusive of factors. Some of the most important determinants of life's paths often arises through the most trivial of circumstances.In short, Goddess Fortuna and her wheel of fortune exerts dramatic influence over our lives. It has the power to transform the improbable into the possible, failure into success and grief into happiness.

So is luck just an external factor out of our control? Well, I believe we can really enhance our chances of being lucky by altering our behaviour and thought. I think lucky people are skilled at creating and noticing opportunities. They make lucky decisions by listening to their intuitions. They have a positive outlook towards life and view glass as half full rather than half empty. This optimistic and positive attitude helps them transform bad luck into good.

Lets take the case of opportunities. It is believed that lucky people consistently stumble upon opportunities whereas unlucky people do not. For example, i went out for a play with one of my friends who is perceived to be lucky. At the reception of the theatre, some company's PR agent asked us to fill a feedback form and lucky draw winners would get a gift hamper. He filled the form and i didn't, thinking why waste time and there is no chance, we'll win. Guess what? he won the lucky draw. So should I label him lucky and myself unlucky or was his openness to the idea of winning, responsible for him actually winning the hampers. This is a mild example, but there are several other occasions where I have seen that his idea of being open to possibilities has helped him to be what we call “lucky”.

I think unlucky people miss opportunities because they are too focused on looking for something specific. Sometimes a opportunity is staring at them but they miss it because they are busy looking for something else. Unlucky people goes out with preconceived notions. They go to parties with the intent on finding their perfect partner and so miss opportunities to make good friends.Lucky people are more relaxed and open, and therefore they see what is there rather than just what they are looking for. By this open attitude, they  introduce themselves to the potential for new opportunities.

But a lucky life is not just about creating and noticing opportunities. It is also about the way we reflect on our life. A popular example among psychologist illustrating this is that of Olympic medallist. Who among the silver or bronze medallist should be more happy? Logic says that since silver medal is better than bronze medal so silver medallist should feel more happy. But on the contrary, it is observed that bronze medallist feels more satisfaction. The silver medallists focuses on the notion that if they had performed slightly better, then they would have perhaps won a gold medal. In contrast, the bronze medallists focus on the thought that if they had performed slightly worse, then they wouldn’t have won anything at all. This ability to imagine what might have happened, rather than what actually did happen is very crucial to the idea of feeling lucky in life.

Lucky people have the ability to imagine spontaneously how the bad luck they encountered could have been even worse and, by doing so, they feel much better about themselves and their lives. This helps them to stay positive and optimistic about their life and increases the likelihood of them continuing to live a lucky life.

Note: - Few ideas have been taken from Richard Wiseman's “The Luck Factor”. Here I am not discussing extreme circumstances, where luck can play a huge factor.

Nehru - Hero of his age and outcaste of ours

  

  As described by well know historian Dr. Ramachandra Guha “Nehru was the hero of his age who has become kind of outcaste in ours. No man has been so greatly revered in his lifetime, and so viciously vilified since his death.” Somehow I think time has eroded his achievements and magnified his failure. There has been so much vicious and unfair criticism of Nehru in recent times that I thought of writing this blog to make people of my generation aware of Nehru's contributions in building of our nation. I think biggest contributor to the decline of Nehru's reputation has been misrule of his next generations (primarily his daughter Indra Gandhi) and his socialist tendencies. 

  No political leader in the history had a more herculean task set up for him. He had to unite a country which was culturally, ethnically, religiously and linguistically divided. He had to unite a country which was fresh from partition on religious lines and saw bloodshed and riots. He had to protect country from becoming Hindu-Pakistan. Only Nehru was capable of doing this impossible task as he was equally respected by Hindus and Muslims, men and women and North Indians and South Indians. He laid a strong foundation for a secular India, promoted a plural ethos and was principal proponent of linguistic freedom of the nation. His work for social reforms like criminalizing caste discrimination, Hindu personal laws which ensured equal rights to women and abolishing zamidari against lots of opposition from outside and within his party laid strong foundation for modern nation.

  Nehru was also the architect of parliamentary democracy. After the death of Gandhi and Patel by 1950, Nehru was the uncrowned king. If he wanted he could have easily gone the other way (i.e. autocracy or dictatorship) like most of the heroes of other nationalist movements did. He could have used any of reasons like partition, riots or so much division in country based on caste, language, religion etc as an excuse. But he believed that institutions are greater than individuals and worked towards making them strong. He was a true democrat. Once when asked what would be his legacy, he replied hopefully, 400 million people capable of governing themselves."

 Nehru believed that science was required to solve the economic problems of a developing society like ours and to make it a strong and self-reliant country it needs scientists competent to hold their own in the world scientific community. He said, “It is science alone that can solve the problems of hunger and poverty, of insanitation and illiteracy, of superstition and deadening custom and tradition, of vast resources running to waste, of a rich country inhabited by starving people. . . . Who indeed could afford to ignore science today? At every turn we have to seek its aid.” Under his guidance institutes of scientific excellence like ISRO, CSIR, ICMR, DRDO were created. Under his vision world class institutes of  higher education like IITs, AIIMs, IIMs and NITs were created. He also oversaw creation of thousands of govt. schools and launched initiatives such as the provision of free milk and meals to children in order to fight malnutrition and get higher student enrollment. While many of us celebrate Indian IT revolution and its large pool of managerial and scientific manpower which is earning accolades world wide., we should not forget that it was Nehru’s vision which build the foundation for this Knowledge-based Economy which we all are celebrating today and bearing fruits from.

  Nehru was also architect of NAM. He gave India standing in world affairs disproportionate of its economic and military power. Some people criticize him for not taking one side (USSR or US) and reaping benefits from that position but Nehru didn’t speak for naked self interest he rather spoke for larger interest of humanity. He was a principled man after all.

 People also criticize Nehru for his socialistic intentions and mixed economic policies. But one needs to look it in perspective. Unlike European and American society where capitalism is viewed as freedom, in India it was viewed as slavery (historical factor i.e. East India company came to trade and enslaved us).  Thus he wanted no foreigner to control resources in India and had state led industrialization which was the call of the hour in 50’s. I agree that in subsequent years India should have liberalized but total blame for not doing that can’t be bestowed on Nehru only.
 
 Yes I agree Nehru can be blamed for soft foreign policy towards China which led to India’s defeat in 1962 Indo-Sino war. He can also be blamed for Kashmir issue over which India has fought 3 wars with it’s neighbor since independence. But I think if we look in totality then his contribution in shaping modern India cannot be undermined. Nehru was a great visionary who single-handedly fashioned India into a forward-looking, modern, secular, liberal democratic state.

India’s Growth Story … Is India really shining?

 

   

In Human Development Index (HDI), which looks beyond GDP to a broader definition of well-being, India ranks 134 among 187 countries. We rank below Nations like Bolivia, Guatemala, El Salvador which saw civil wars and are often deemed as poorest nations. Nation like Cuba which has zero billionaires, a nation which has faced a huge economic blockade since its birth, ranks 73 places ahead of us at 51.  None of these nations have an annual average GDP growth of 7.9%. None of these nations aspire to be economic super power. None of these nations have human resource with technical and scientific capabilities like ours. In short, even nations much poorer than us have done a lot better than we have. 

  48% of India's children under the age of 5 are chronically malnourished due to poor diet and lack of nutrients in their food. We are home to the largest number of malnourished children in the world. India stands 67th out of 81 countries ranked in the Global Hunger Index. Our figure of Children malnourishment makes figures of sub-Saharan Africa look good. 

At the time India got its Constitution, over 45% of people were officially below poverty line. According to latest poverty estimates, the proportion of people below poverty line are down to 37% (Taking estimate of Tendulkar committee, Arjun Sen Gupta committee suggested this figure to be 77%) , whereas, Gross domestic product (GDP) has quantum-leaped by over 500 times in the same period. Yes I agree that our nation has prospered in recent times but that prosperity has been limited to only few. The thing which has grown fasted in last 20 years is not IT but inequality.

 I think it's time we start thinking about development and not mere growth. So often we use these worlds interchangeably. Growth is quantitative, whereas development is qualitative in nature. Growth is just ‘getting bigger’, whereas development is improvement. Do we really want to be a nation where 70% of population doesn’t matter? If we don’t start addressing this issue seriously then we run risk of political instability because political equality is unsustainable without social and economic inequalities. The spread of Naxalism is an indication of this phenomenon.

Note: - HDI was devised with collaborative effort of Pakistani economist Mahbub ul Haq and Indian economist Amartya Sen.

Micro Review of 84th Oscar Best Movie Nominees

With Oscar Awards just a week away I thought of sharing my views on these years Best Movie Nominees. In this Era of Micro-Blogging and diminishing Attention Span I have tried to keep my reviews to 2-3 Lines.

War horse is an emotional drama that moves its audience with Spielberg's customary flair.It is Beautifully shot epic movie with splendid background score.It is a joyous, uplifting and sentimental film.It's a worthwhile experience which reminds one of Black Beauty and Saving Private Ryan.Rating-7/10.

The Descendants is a meaningful, Intelligent ,dramatic film about a guy who is coping with a dying, unfaithful wife and understanding the nuances of parenthood. It's an emotional roller coaster ride which is highly recommended. Rating-8/10 …

Moneyball is a smart, intense biographical film about how Billy Beane (General manager of Oakland Athletic Baseball team) assembles a competitive team with a payroll that is a mere fraction of that of league Giants like New York Yankees. It’s a movie about the war between intuition and statistics.Rating-7.5/10.

The Help is an entertaining, touching, involving and wonderfully acted movie set during Civil Rights era in America in the early 1960s. It is a tale told from point of black maids who raises little white girls with great love and care but these little girls inexorably turns into their mothers and mistreats them( with rare exceptions). Rating-7/10

The Tree of Life is one of the most ambitious films ever made which tries to understand meaning of life. It has scenes from beginning of universe to its end. It is an emotional as well as visual treat. It is a metaphysical, psychological and spiritual inquiry into mankind’s place in this universe. It is one of those movies which even after watching multiple times is difficult to comprehend. Highly Recommended Rating- 8/10

Midnight in Paris is romantic comedy fantasy film directed by Woody Allen, who I consider is a treasure to cinema. This film is about a universal belief that if we lived in particular Golden Age, life would be so much simpler and fun. It is a love letter to Paris. Rating- 7/10

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close is a story about a precocious boy trying to reconcile with the death of his father in 9/11 while finding the lock that matches a mysterious key left behind by his father. This movie is emotionally draining and has lots of implausible elements in its story which at times makes it difficult to watch. Rating – 6/10

The Artist is a charming, delightful movie with drama, comedy, action and romance gorgeously intertwined. It reminds one of great movies like Kagaaz ke Phool, Singin in the Rain and Sunset Blvd. It is a love letter to silent cinema. It is an experience that shouldn’t be missed. Rating – 8/10

Hugo: I am yet to see this film. It is releasing on 16th March in India.

Problem of plenty … Why having more choices is not always good?

In today’s world, there is an explosion of choices. We have more choices than ever before. But are we better of with so many choices? Well on surface it looks quite logical that more choices are always good. But recent research strongly suggests that, psychologically, this assumption is wrong. Although having some choice is undoubtedly better than none but more is not always better than less.

When people are faced with having to choose one option out of many desirable choices, they begin to consider hypothetical trade-offs. They begin searching for the most ideal option. They evaluate options in terms of missed opportunities instead of the opportunity's potential. They become compulsive comparers. The sense of lose is caused due to having let go other opportunities. One of the costs of making a selection is losing the opportunities that a different option would have afforded. This leads to anxiety and sometimes opportunity costs may create enough conflict to produce paralysis i.e. one chooses to not chose at all. People start deferring there decisions because of fear of anticipated regret i.e. what if they chose less desirable alternative.

Even if one is able to chose, the satisfaction out of that choice suffers. One may do well objectively but feels worse. Losing opportunity of the good parts of other options make even good choices look less good. Unchosen possibilities linger forever. Feeling of regret also creeps. You start blaming yourself for not choosing the most appropriate option. When there are so many options, chances increase that a really good one is out there, and you feel that you ought to have been able to find it. It’s easy to imagine a better alternative. End result is under appreciation and self blame. But when there are limited number of options what one really does is he blames the world and there is blame-sharing which leads to no regret.

So what does all this mean? Does it mean that we would all be better of if our choices were severely restricted, even eliminated? I do not think so. The relation between choice and well-being is very complicated. Some choices is better is than none but there is some magical number (which I do not know) after which additional choices starts showing negative effects.