Dissecting a unique trivalry

Tennis is a game I have been following for about 21 years now. From the time I remember, men's tennis has hardly been more exciting. What makes it tick? Is it the quality of the players or is it the pace of the game? The answer, I firmly believe, lies in the tripartite struggle for supremacy among Roger Federer, Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic. Rivalries have been a part of the game and characterised it for ages. It was Laver-Newcombe in the 1960s, Borg-Connors/Borg-McEnroe and later McEnroe-Connors in the 1970s and early 80s, the outstanding serve and volley exponents Becker and Edberg in the late 1980s who were constantly challenged by the athletic Ivan Lendl and the American greats Pete Sampras and Andre Agassi who played and lived in contrasting styles for much of the 90s. But there never has been a 'trivalry' of the kind that has emerged in recent years following the rise of Djokovic. The Serb, who for years played in the shadow of Federer and Nadal and nursed fitness issues, has raised his game to a formidable level that can consistently challenge and even topple the two greats. But then, providence (three players fighting it out at one time) alone can't quite be a reason for people to love and crave for more contests. The contrast in styles, the variety in approaches, the mental match-ups and above all the personalities contribute to making each match a spectacle. I have waited a while to write this one and analyse this extraordinary 'trivalry'. There can be no better occasion to do so right after one of the finest matches played in my memory between Djokovic and Nadal with the Serb prevailing for the third time in three finals. Rings a bell?? Read on....

Federer turned pro in the late 1990s when Sampras was still in his pomp. Agassi as well had returned from a lay-off and slump to seriously challenge Sampras, who was able to stamp his authority on all Slams except the French where his serve and volley game was seriously hampered by the slowness of the surface. Federer had been junior Wimbledon Champion but no one quite expected him to challenge Sampras in their fourth-round clash in 2001. Sampras had won seven Wimbledon titles in eight years and had given a lesson in grass court tennis to Agassi and Rafter in the two previous finals. On that day, however, Federer played some of the most delightful shots and served and volleyed better than the great man on the other side. He stunned Sampras in five absorbing sets but went on to lose to Tim Henman in the next round. He made a shock exit in the first round in 2002 losing to Croatia's Mario Ancic but was getting better by the day. In 2003, he made his first major breakthrough when he won Wimbledon by beating the big-serving Mark Philippoussis. In 2004, he grabbed the number one ranking after winning three of the Slams with the highlight being the 6-0 7-6 6-0 demolition of former no.1 Lleyton Hewitt. The tennis world seemed to be Federer's to have but he was beaten in the semis of the Australian Open by Marat Safin in a glorious five-setter and then by the 18-year old Nadal in the semis in Roland Garros. However, he added the remaining two slams to his collection and repeated the three-slam year twice more in 2006 and 2007.

Nadal, however, was getting better exponentially. He built his game around a mind-boggling stamina and physique. He had the ability to make the best movers (read Michael Chang in the 90s) look pedestrian. Nadal was comfortably beaten in Wimbledon 2006 and was struggling for impact on the hard courts by virtue of possessing a clay court game centered around top-spin. His learning ability was remarkable and in the very next year, Nadal gave Federer a run for his money before losing in five tight sets in Wimbledon. The warning signals for the great Swiss were there. Nadal had dominated Federer on clay already beating him three times in three years in the finals in Paris and added a fourth scalp when he demolished him in straight sets in 2008. It was to get better soon as he pipped Federer on the lawns of Wimbledon 6-4 6-4 6-7 6-7 9-7 in a classic. His hold on Federer continued as he bested the man from Basel in five enthralling sets in Melbourne in 2009. Federer won his first French title in the same year as Nadal was shockingly handed a fourth-round loss by the Swede Robin Soderling. Nadal played Federer twice later in the French Open finals in 2011 and the Australian Open semis in 2012 and there was no respite. He had got into the Swiss' mind and had no intention of letting him go. Nadal had problems of his own though and ran into a brick wall named Djokovic in the final.

Djokovic always had the talent and was considered a huge talent. But his body and temperament deserted him at vital moments for almost four years. He lost his first final (US Open 2007) to Federer despite having the edge in the first two sets. He exacted some revenge in the 2008 Australian Open as he beat a slightly unfit Federer and then the surprise finalist Jo-Wilfred Tsonga to capture his first title. Between then and the start of 2011,Djokovic had to contend with the best form of Federer and Nadal and often failed to match up. His fitness was a huge question mark and he had to deal with it if he wanted to have any chance at all. In the US Open semis in 2010, he staved off two match points and upset Federer only to lose to Nadal in the final. 2011 was the 'annus mirabilis' as far as Djokovic was concerned. He embarked on a 41-match winning streak and won the Australian Open beating Andy Murray before his tremendous run was halted by Federer in a superb contest in the semis in Paris. This was only a minor blip for the now rejuvenated and well-oiled Djokovic as he beat Nadal in the finals of the next two Slams. Perhaps, Djokovic's biggest triumph came not in a final but in the semis in New York when he fought back from two sets down against Federer and edged the 16-time Grand Slam winner. At the end of the year, he was by far the best player in the world and Nadal was the first to admit that the Serb had a psychological hold over him after winning all six finals they clashed in. Nadal would surely know this for he had a similar hold on Federer over the years. Djokovic cemented his vice-like grip over the Mallorcan by coming up trumps in the longest Grand Slam final (5 hours and 53 min) in Melbourne after fighting back from a set down initially and a break down in the fifth.

Now that the players have been analysed, it is time to dissect the 'trivalry'. Three greats with different game plans and styles pitted against each other often enough in a year almost surely means one can learn from his mistakes and come back better the next time. But this does not always happen because the mind has been scarred after certain battles. A player's style gives him the edge over another but is a liability against the third. One's strength becomes a weakness against another player. A detailed examination of the playing styles is an interesting exercise and reveals the reasons behind the dominance of one player in the head-to-head record.

The Federer-Nadal rivalry was the first of the major match-ups. Federer was easily the more gifted and was capable of playing surreal tennis with an almost impossible ease. He glided across the court and bemused opponents with his languid motion. Till he came up against Nadal in 2005, no player had the answer to the Swiss genius' abilities. Nadal was a different cup of tea. He played a very different game centered around brute force and stamina. He could run all day and muscled the ball from virtually all corners of the court. His heavy top spinning forehand created a difficult angle and the prodigious bounce meant that Federer with his single-hand backhand could not never force the issue. Nadal read this early and made sure he would pound the Federer backhand with his spinning forehand. Short replies from Federer inevitably meant that Nadal would dictate the points. Also the natural left handers angle on the ad court gave Nadal an advantage serving wide to the Federer backhand from where the Swiss could never get into a winning position. Federer thus was at an obvious disadvantage whenever he faced a breakpoint or was on the verge of trying to convert one. The breakpoint conversion stats for the two players tell the story. Thirdly, Federer had to rely a lot on his serve to stay in points against Nadal. If Federer got into a rally, he never was quite sure about the shot placement and how to time his arrival to the net as he feared Nadal's pace across the court. Nadal's style may have given him the wins and the mental edge over Federer but it has fallen right into the hands of Djokovic.

The Nadal-Djokovic match-up is an interesting case. It is another example of how defeats leave lasting impressions. Nadal led Djokovic comfortably for the first four years before the Serb beat Nadal for the first time im a Slam in iImbledon 2011. Before the Wimbledon triumph, Djokovic had got the better of the Spaniard on the hard courts in Indian Wells and Miami and on the clay in Rome and Madrid. What did Djokovic have that the enormously gifted Federer did not? And what made Nadal look so helpless as he became the first man in the Open Era to lose three consecutive finals (seven finals so far against the Serb). Djokovic has a much improved double-handed backhand which is the best in the business. He can be aggressive with it hitting both cross court and down the line winners at will. He is able to target the Nadal forehand with his powerful backhand and run the left-hander off the court to set up the point. His forehand is also more powerful than Federer's as he hits it down the line flat with more venom. His cross court forehand torments Nadal's backhand and weak returns often mean the Spaniard can never gain control. Djokovic is also moving as well as anybody and has the best service return going around. He cancels Nadal's advantage from the ad court by virtue of being able to return powerfully with the two handed backhand unlike Federer who can mostly chip or slice when the ball goes away. With Djokovic matching his pace, Nadal struggles to come up with an alternative plan. His top spin serve and shots fall into the Serb's hands. Djokovic is able to impart more ball speed and strike better when the ball is high than when it is played flat like in matches against Federer.

The Federer-Djokovic contest is unique. Federer has the game to trouble Djokovic and beat him nearly every time. But age and reflexes are fast catching up on the Swiss. He has failed to close out matches from winning positions in two consecutive US Open semis but was able to pull off a remarkable win in Paris when he stopped the red-hot Djokovic in four sets. Federer serves suoerbly and disguises the angles well which means Djokovic cannot quite get a pattern in returning. Federer hits a single-handed backhand which is a liability against Nadal but not so against the Serb who also hits the ball flat. Federer mixes up his game and uses the slice more often than the other two to control the play. His low ball (slice) makes it much harder for Djokovic to hit winners. The Serb, however, has won three of his last four meeting in Grand Slams against Federer and is succeeding mostly not because of his playing style but because of his mental strength and newly-gained endurance.

The three players have given much to savour and promise much more in the near future. Men's tennis hardly needed a boost but has got its shot in the arm now. Andy Murray was brilliant in the Australian Open and is getting ever so close to that elusive title. When that happens, the state of the game can only get better. Lip smacking fare indeed. Bring it on guys!

The immortal hero

It all started very normally. I just got back from a nice session of table tennis and sat down at the table for dinner. Mom was tired and bored and suddenly, to her surprise, discovered that 'Thalapathi' was playing on TV. Without any further delay, mom turned the TV on and sat down to watch the movie for the umpteenth time. I was no different. The movie is special for a number of reasons. Mani Ratnam's uncanny ability to get any actor to produce a brilliant performance, the stunning screenplay and dialogues, Ilayaraja's heavenly music and background score and most of all the life-like depiction of perhaps the greatest friendship story in Hindu Mythology- that of Karna and Duryodhana (in this case Surya and Devraj).

Karna.. well, the very name evokes a sense of charm, a feeling of delight and I cannot help but applaud and respect the great hero. Beyond a shadow of doubt, he is the one character in the great epic who truly touches the soul. Abhimanyu may have impressed one and all with his display of valour but Karna's divine grace is augmented by his benevolence and loyalty. Born to Kunti when she was unmarried, Karna is discarded by the princess who fears that her reputation may be tarnished if she is found with a child before her marriage. Karna, born with the Kavacha (armour) and Kundala (ear rings), was the son of Surya, the sun God. With a heavy heart Kunti lets him go and he is rescued and brought up by Adiratha (a charioteer) and Radha. Henceforth, the great Kshatriya went on to be known as Radheya (son of Radha).

Karna, who exhibited exceptional talent at archery, sought to hone his skills under the tutelage of the great Dronacharya who was the preceptor for the royals. Drona was handpicked by the great Bhishma to train the Pandavas and Kauravas in all aspects of warfare. Always partial to Arjuna, Drona even had the thumb of Ekalavya (a tribal boy who seemed capable of bettering Arjuna) cut to prevent anyone from surpassing his favourite student. Karna was also disregarded when he approached Drona as he was deemed to be of a lower birth. Little did the great guru know of Karna's true birth story. Undeterred, Karna practised regularly and was soon an archer nonpareil. When the time came for the princes to demonstrate their prowess and acquired skills, Karna walked into the arena and challenged Arjuna. Arjuna had just performed a dazzling array of feats and left the spectators awestruck with his seemingly divine ability to wield the bow. Karna, who had left disappointed when Drona refused to teach him, had sought the guidance of the great Parashurama instead. Parashurama, an incarnation of Vishnu, was a Kshatriya hater who had sworn vengeance on the clan as they were responsible for the death of his righteous father Jamadagni. Karna knew of this hatred and disguised himself as a Brahmin so as to learn from the great Acharya.

Indra, the father of Arjuna(again born through the boon granted by Durvasa just as Karna was born earlier), wanted to ensure that his son remained unbeatable. He, taking the form of a bee, stung Karna's lap on which Parashurama was sleeping. Karna bore the immense pain without any reaction but when the warm blood trickled across and touched the guru, he woke up and was shocked at what he saw. Quickly he questioned Karna about his true identity and cursed him to forget the knowledge of the greatest weapon (the Brahmastra). The great prince was also cursed when he inadvertently shot a cow. Despite these curses, Karna's skills as an archer remained unchallenged.

Karna was snubbed by all present in the arena but Duryodhana came to his rescue and anointed him the king of Anga. This was the beginning of a remarkable friendship that was to last for life. Karna stood by Duryodhana through thick and thin. Karna was denied once again when Draupadi refused to marry him because of his low birth. Karna never forgot this insult and spoke low of the princess when the Pandavas were on the losing side in the game of dice. Following their exile, the Pandavas returned asking for their share of the kingdom but were not welcomed by Duryodhana who had all but declared himself the sole heir to the throne. When talks failed and Krishna's efforts to reconcile the two groups fell in vain, war seemed imminent.

Bhishma, the omniscient grandsire, knew of Karna's birth. He never brought himself to tell Karna about it though. Kunti and Krishna spoke to the great warrior about his birth and asked him to get back to the Pandava camp where he wpuld be the rightful heir. Karna, the magnanimous and loyal one, refused. He never left Duryodhana's side for it was the latter who had come to his aid when he needed it the most. Taking advantage of Karna's legendary philanthropic nature, Indra once again disguised himself as a Brahmin and asked Karna for his Kavacha and Kundalas. Karna knew the reason why this was happening but did not refuse. He gave them away and the shamed Indra in return, bestowed on him his great weapon which he could use only once. Karna, who refused to fight the war till Bhishma fell (i.e. the tenth day) was stuck with guilt at the fall of the grandsire. Bhishma advised Karna to join the Pandavas too but to no avail.

Karna had promised Kunti that he would never kill any of her other sons and that she would always have five sons in the end. Either he or Arjuna was going to be killed. Karna ended up using Indira's weapon on Bheema's son Ghatotkacha who was proving to be destructive in the night (under Drona's leadership, the war continued after sunset). Ghatotkacha was Krishna's way of distracting Karna and his best idea to save Arjuna from the potent weapon in Karna's hands. Karna took over the Kaurava army at the fall of Drona and reinforced the idea of Dharmyayuddha (righteous war) which had gone missing after Bhishma's fall. He spared the lives of four Pandavas true to his word and also spared Arjuna at the end of the day citing his reverence to the rules of warfare (sunset had passed and it was against the rules to fight on).

On the 17th day of battle, Karna was terror incarnate and nobody looked like being able to stop him. Shalya (Karna's charioteer), who had been critical of Karna for a while, quickly started appreciating him. When he faced Arjuna, Karna tormented the son of Indra repeatedly and cut his bow string on multiple occasions only for Arjuna to replace them in a flash. Then in a critical moment, Karna all but beheaded Arjuna with a sharp arrow only for Krishna to save his favourite disciple by pressing the chariot down. The arrow knocked out Arjuna's crown instead and gave him a new lease of life. Alas the moment of truth had arrived. Karna's curses were beginning to take effect at the most vital juncture. He could not recall the knowledge of the divine astras and his wheel was lodged in the ground. When he got off to lift it, Arjuna waited as it was not worthy of a Kshatriya to engage and unarmed man in combat. However, goaded by Krishna and driven by revenge for his son's (Abhimanyu's) tragic death, Arjuna proceeded to kill the one and only Karna.

When Karna fell, a pall of gloom descended. It was as if the sun had set. The greatest of warriors and the finest of human beings was no more. His unwavering loyalty, unquestionable valour and above all his impeccable standing among kings make Karna unique in Indian mythology. He might have been a tragic hero who had no luck but his name will remain immortal for more than one reason. Karna represents bravery, devotion, magnanimity and is a paradigm of a perfect man. In Bhasa's 'Karnabharam', the playwright talks about the legendary hero's despondency before the war. Perhaps only Karna could have chosen the path he did despite knowing the riches that lay on the other side. Long live the name of the most glorious and inspirational of characters!

The ‘Why’ of Sports

Reading the line 'For if you can meet with triumph and disaster and treat those two impostors just the same' from Rudyard Kipling's beautiful poem 'IF', I can't help but feel that it signifies the very essence of sport. Being a sports fanatic, I have asked myself on many occasions the questions - why sports and what makes them special? I can talk for hours about sports without experiencing an iota of boredom but can't bring myself to do any useful task for even an hour. I am unable to remember the day and date in the present week but am able to recall obscure numbers from a forgotten match played in the previous century. I cannot bring myself to spend money on a good phone but am more than eager to buy sports DVDs and decorate my home with posters of sports stars. My family and most friends have given up on me after noticing my tendency to correlate every second occurrence in life with a sports event. So, I thought it's about time I try and demystify this fascination for sport.

The biggest reason why people love sports and worship sports stars is because sport is the most natural extension of a man's physical abilities. We evolved to use our limbs to run, trained our senses and movement to hunt prey and protect ourselves from predators. Man developed weapons to aid him in these tasks and success in hunting often used to bring him the greatest satisfaction. After thousands of years, men still run and compete in athletics, throw the javelin, duck a cricket ball, hit the angles in tennis and score a goal in football. If these are not natural extensions of his physical abilities, what are they?

Any other career requires the use of computers, the need to study and more often than not, multiple academic qualifications. These careers can be lucrative but are hardly endearing. They may entice briefly but lack the ability to sustain interest. Technology is increasingly used in sports but essentially, it is still the natural movements and reflexes that define and shape an athlete's performance. It's all fine saying that sports are loved because they are extensions of a man's natural capabilities but then is that all sports have to offer?

The answer is a big no. Sports events are arenas where the best and worst aspects of a man's behaviour tend to manifest themselves. Sports stars can be exceedingly gracious on occasions and exhibit a terrific spirit on the field. Why else would phrases such as 'sporting behaviour and sportsmanship' be used and highly regarded? To be a winner and yet not forget the vanquished is something that sets the best of stars apart. Think back to Andrew Flintoff moving away from his celebrating team mates and crouching by Brett Lee to console the latter. Or cast your mind back to Rafael Nadal, who so gracefully hugged a teary-eyed Roger Federer after the Australian Open final in 2009. These moments matter. These scenes are rooted in your memory and confirm the beauty and charm of sport.

Sports foster a competitive spirit like no other. The best players boast a never-say-die attitude and an iron will to succeed despite all the odds stacked against them. They manage to find motivation when all seems lost and keep the flame burning. How else can one explain Brian Lara's extraordinary match-winning innings against an all-conquering Australia even though there was hardly any hope? Manchester United's remarkable last-minute heroics against Bayern Munich only reaffirm that the best never give up. Whenever I have been in the doldrums, I have gathered my spirits by thinking back to these wonderful acts of defiance. Sports have changed me as a person. I have appreciated the value of team work and persevered till I realise success but more importantly, I have learned to be a graceful loser. Sports stars may be rich and pampered in this day and age but this does not take away the fact that they struggled in the past and sacrificed many comforts to reach the top. The history of various sports is rife with tales of legends who came from the bottom strata of society and worked their way to fame and immortality. Numerous stars may have failed to live with the adulation and stardom and instead been lured by mammon. This is no slur on sport but is a prime example of man's vulnerabilities.

Don Bradman may have scored a hundred virtually every time he batted and seemed invincible but his final duck brought a sense of poignancy and humanness with it. Perfection is boring but not so man’s vulnerability and fallibility. They make sports special. They bring in a sense of randomness which characterises our lives. Life finds its greatest analogy in sport. The highs, the lows, the victories, the defeats, the praises, the criticism…

One does not need to look further than sports to understand mankind's diversity. The genes and environment combine seamlessly to bring out varied characteristics among players. Sample traits as diverse as Maradona's sheer genius interspersed with moments of madness, the flair of the Caribbean masters, Garrincha's out-of-the-world ability to enthrall despite being afflicted with polio, Sachin Tendulkar's poise and grace and many more. Sports provide the viewer with opportunities to identify his heroes, idolise them and yet learn from their mistakes. Sports thrill the senses, calm the tensed mind and importantly leave an indelible mark in the memory. Evolution has made man love anything remotely connected with sports and relate with sporting achievements as if they were his own.

CLR James, in his classic book 'Beyond a Boundary' says 'What do they know of cricket who only cricket know?' This is more than a valid point. No sport can be truly appreciated and understood without knowledge of the diverse characters involved, the history of the sport and the circumstances surrounding an achievement. West Indian cricket can never quite be enjoyed unless one learns about the effect racial politics had on people. The urge for the Caribbean natives to break free and hit back is captured quite superbly in Stevan Riley's Fire in Babylon. Brazilian football for all its simplicity and sorcery can never be relished if one does not appreciate the nature of the people in the country. History matters a great deal. Wimbledon would never have been what it is if not for its glorious past. Lord's, Old Trafford, MCG are not like any other arena. They are symbols that have defined what we are. Sports provide a different perspective, stimulate thoughts and foster an interest in various fields. Most people would laugh at Harold Pinter's suggestion that Test cricket (sports) is better than sex. But then, I wonder if there is some truth concealed there. While the latter provides a heavenly but fleeting high, sports leave infinite memories that are more than likely to last a lifetime. Rather inevitably, after having begun with the question 'Why sports?’, I have reached a stage when I wonder 'Why life without sports?'

Destroyer nonpareil

I had never really imagined I would sit down to write a blog on AIDS. But then, on World AIDS day, I think back and feel that there has never been such a scourge in mankind's long history. There have been hundreds of infectious diseases that have tormented, killed and plagued humans for years, but none that has been able to withstand every attempt made to suppress it. Be it the great plague, TB, smallpox or polio, scientists have inevitably been able to discover drugs and vaccines to deal with, and in some cases, eradicate the disease. AIDS, however, has been a completely different monster. It was first discovered about thirty years back after a number of cases of a rare form of pneumonia were diagnosed in male patients. All of them seemed to be affected by a immune-suppressor virus and also exhibited a homosexual lifestyle. Soon, incidences of Kaposi Sarcoma, a rare form of cancer, were also found in multiple patients. Then, the disease was thought to be one that solely affected homosexuals and syringe-sharing drug abusers. This, however, turned out to be just the beginning. Hundreds of cases started sprouting up in Africa and Asia where the lifestyle was very different from the high-risk groups in America and Europe. Authorities quickly realised that heterosexuals were just as likely to be affected by this disease. The discovery of this fact completely changed the way the threat was perceived.

The HIV in short for Human immuno-deficiency virus was in many ways similar to a strain of virus found to be causing an immuno disorder in monkeys (SIV). IT was suspected to have resulted from some kind of mutation in the SIV. HIV, a retrovirus, synthesises its DNA from RNA using an enzyme called reverse transcriptase. It is spread mainly through sexual/blood contact via unprotected sex, sharing syringes and to a lesser extent blood transfusion. The virus, after getting into the body, strikes by eliminating immune cells (T-lymphocytes). Although the immune system counters the virus by producing enough antibodies in the beginning, it soon loses the battle as the virus replicates and takes control. Once the immune system is bypassed, the rest of the body is highly susceptible to multiple infections. Although the virus is extremely dangerous and life-threatening once it enters the host, it is one of the least effective when it comes to transmission. The HIV virus can hardly survive for even a few hours outside the human body and cannot be transmitted by physical contact, through the air or by mosquitoes. Considering how destructive the virus can be, it's weak transmissibility is perhaps nature's biggest lifeline.

People who suspect infection undergo either the ELISA (enzyme linked immuno sorbent assay) or the Western Blot Test to detect the virus' presence. These are the two most popular and reliable tests available for the detection of infection. HIV, though, is an extremely difficult pathogen to deal with. It continuously mutates and tends to become drug resistant. Anti-viral drugs therefore, are incapable of providing a cure. However, a lethal combination of powerful anti-viral drugs known as HAART (Highly advanced anti retro-viral therapy) is used to treat HIV-infected patients. By using a combination of drugs, the virus' ability to become resistant is quelled. Infected individuals are thus able to add years to their lives but this treatment comes at an exorbitant cost which very few can afford. Recent studies have found that humans carrying the CCR5 mutation (deletion of a portion on the CCR5 gene) are resistant to HIV infection. This mutation is at the heart of genetic therapy (vaccine and drug research) in many AIDS research centres in the USA and Europe.

While the long struggle for a cure or a vaccine is underway, it is imperative to understand that the best possible approach to fighting this killer disease is by education. Negligence and ignorance are the biggest hurdles. People must be educated on the importance of safe sex and the avoidance of risky practices (drug abuse, promiscuous behaviour). Also, people should learn to care for HIV-infected patients and treat them with respect. They are often ostracised by society for no fault of theirs. It is time for us to learn, educate and advise people to understand the grave consequences of the disease and guide the youngsters so that the spread of the disease can be controlled greatly. In the meanwhile, the extraordinary efforts of scientists all over the world can be directed at finding a highly-elusive cure or vaccine. Man has, after all, successfully survived hundreds of calamities over the centuries. Hope springs eternal.....

One of a kind..

All of us were taught the value of good friends and friendship during our school days. I am no exception. I listened to the saying 'A friend in need is a friend indeed' more than a hundred times till it seemed to become a cliche. A few years later, I watched Sholay, enjoyed 'Yeh Dosti' and felt there was something special about the friendship between Jai and Veeru. I read the Mahabharata dozens of times and admired the great relationship shared by Duryodhana and Karna. Furthermore, I learned and appreciated innumerable beautifully-constructed Sanskrit verses that glorified good company. But then, I wasn't quite at that stage in life where I would be able to understand and feel true friendship. Perhaps, I wasn't quite in strife to meet the 'friend in need'. I never quite knew the reason anyway. Life moved on and I was never short of a good pals. Be it near home or in school and college, I was always fortunate to know and interact with an exceptional group. When I was about to fly to the US in December 2005, my dad's advice about friends and friendship kept ringing in my ears. I continue to be inspired by his ability to maintain an extraordinarily wide circle of friends and I left India that day aiming to do the same.

I was alone, bored, homesick and frankly irritated with the whole experience of being in the US. All this well before even a month passing by after getting there. Few fellow-students were in the US in January. The vast majority had left for their vacation to India. The terrible cold and snow compounded by my inability to cook and failure to acclimatise to the new place left me wishing I should board the next flight home. It was on one such evening (perhaps Jan 20th 2006), when I looking fairly despondent, stepped into D-13, an apartment that was to change my life. I sat on the sofa with a bemused look as I was introduced to a long-haired guy who seemed to be the one everybody was talking to. I could not quite fathom why he was the object of attention. I soon realised he was just back from India (a rare event for many, but a biannual one for him). He had news to share about his trips, meetings and most of all about a girl he met. We started arguing about something I can't quite recall. It must have been a Bangalore-Chennai debate given its ability to recur with an almost unreal frequency over the years. It did not matter who won or lost the argument. I felt there was something about this guy that made my time and stay worthwhile. Nearly five years after that day, as I sit and write about it, I cannot help but feel fortunate to have met and known Deepak who is more popularly referred to as JD (pun intended).

We hit it off instantly. I had never had problems making friends anywhere but got the feeling this was something special. I started living in I-9 (his apartment) where we cooked, watched sports, debated over a plethora of topics, discussed girls, relationships and everything under the sun. I first realised how much he meant to me when I called him and cried about a major problem I was facing in the first semester. Here I was crying and seeking motivation from someone whom I had just recently met. I clearly had not made a mistake. He guided me through that tough phase with the best possible advice and encouragement. By then, he was continuously thinking about his summer visit to India. The trip by itself was nothing new for him, but this time, he was going to meet the girl he had fallen for head over heels. I remember sitting with him and poring through her email about a trip (a very long email indeed). We joked about the ability of girls to write pages without sparing a thought for the reader. I responded to the mail with Shakespeare's immortal line 'Brevity is the soul of wit'. I can't quite recall what I got in return but am fairly sure it wasn't an affirmative nod. Deepak had never quite managed to get through the Himalayan task of completing a book till then. He was blessed with a remarkable memory of dates and numbers though and it was no surprise then that he remembered the page number of an interesting portion of the only book he had dared to start reading (Kane and Abel) :). He wasn't quite going to get away easily with his girl though and was asked to complete the Godfather in 2-3 days. He read the book religiously while skipping cricket and quoted Vito Corleone on more than one occasion. Although I laughed at his predicament, I appreciated his resolve and willingness to compromise.

In the course of the next 1.5 years, we bonded like never before. I was present throughout to listen to the issues he faced in his relationship. It was a mighty struggle but he endured all the problems as only he could. It was as if nothing could perturb him. We would lie for hours on a sleeping bag in D-13 and talk. There were days when we realised we had spoken all the time till sunrise. And on more than one occasion I would continue to talk blissfully unaware that he had dozed off. He was by my side when the job hunt and interviews were not going right. When I decided to move to California in December 2007 to land a job, he saw me off at the Greyhound bus station in Lawrence. At that point, I felt a tinge of sadness because I wasn't quite sure when I would see him. It wasn't going to be too long though! He was in California in less than a month with a full-time job. We moved into a friend's place temporarily and later, to 2622 Ohlone Drive, a town house in San Jose which I can never forget.

I have often wondered how my best and worst times could have coincided. It was the case in 2008. The recession was a reality and jobs were at a premium. I tried hard but struggled to land interview calls and even when I did perform well, visa problems put paid to my chances. My grandmother's loss was a very difficult one to deal with and on that fateful day in May, as i sat in Starbucks not knowing how to react at the news of her demise, guess who was by my side? Deepak made me tide through a phase where I was considering giving up. He was at once my greatest motivator and harshest critic. He doubled up as my confidant and jester. Without him, I could not have imagined surviving 2008. I worked extremely hard to complete my Masters and there was no better person to encourage me than JD. Life was at its doldrums and he remained the rock I used throughout for support. When I had to leave the US, I felt a pain like no other. It was impossible to stay away. I came to the US in tears in 2005 and was leaving the same way. I had a fantastic friend network during my stay but my biggest gain was Deepak's acquaintance. The numerous tennis matches, the arguments, the escapades on our road trips, the humourous exchanges and most of all the confidence and motivation he had provided at various stages flashed before me as i boarded the flight back to Bangalore. Little did I know that his influence on my life had just begun.

Growing up idolising the legendary Karna, I had always wondered if there could ever be another like him. I can stick my neck out to say that Deepak comes closest. Never one to shy away from helping someone in distress, be it monetarily or through his words, Deepak made me understand the value of giving. He shunned materialistic thoughts and his ideals rubbed off on me. I had heard many episodes about how he went out of his way to help his friends and I wasn't surprised. He did the same for me and continues to help me to this date. My hand instinctively dials his number or points to his email whenever I need any favour. I have never felt the need to think twice because I know it's Deepak. My troubled times in the US led me to accrue humongous debts. If it were not for his timely help in the last few years, I would have drowned in that very sea of debts and credit loans. Even in the one year I lived in Madras, I can only recall the month I spent with him during his visit. Not a single day was boring and every minute was eventful. He was also the force behind my decision to follow my passion. He radiated positive energy always and every ounce of the confidence I have can be attributed to him.

Deepak has been everything I can ask for. He has encouraged, chided, advised, goaded and more importantly has driven me to succeed. He has been my shining light and I have only wondered how I haven't known him longer. He is THE PARADIGM when it comes to describing a great friend. I have been immensely lucky to have had him in my life and will be indebted to him always. Nithya, you are tremendously lucky yourself to have found such a jewel. I cannot help but feel that it is impossible to do justice to his great nature and qualities in one piece. But I will certainly sleep well filled with the thought that I have given him a small gift in return for all the positives I have gained (and am gaining) during my association with him. He now stands on the cusp of achieving something special. His marriage may seem a normal event to many, but I for one, have witnessed his patience and steadfastness through the trials and tribulations of the last five years. The culmination of the marriage represents a victory for me too as I would have seen my greatest pal win his toughest battle. Certainly, no one can be happier than I am!

PS: dei Deepak, you might not like me writing all this. But live with it!

Historically....

Hey guys

Back with another crossword.. this time on another of my favourite topics- History.. it's mostly based on Modern Indian and World history (mostly 20th century stuff and the World War 2).. so good luck and happy solving!

Across
4. Party founded by Rajagopalachari to oppose policies of Congress ----------- (9)
Swatantra 5. Supreme Commander of Allies during the D-day landings------------- (10)
Eisenhower 8. Area of Czechoslovakia permitted for annexation under the Munich pact-------- (11)
Sudetenland 12. One of India's youngest revolutionaries to be hanged- at just 18 years------------ (8, 4)
Khudiram Bose 14. Handed Indira Gandhi shock defeat in Rae Bareli in 1977 elections------------ (3, 6)
Raj Narain 15. This proposal immediately preceded the Quit India movement------------ (6)
Cripps 17. Involved in the 'Kakori Conspiracy'--------- (6)
Bismil 20. German chancellor succeeded by Hitler--------- (10)
Hindenburg 22. Hitler's mistress whom he married just before committing suicide in his bunker------------- (3, 5)
Eva Braun 23. CBS journalist and war correspondent who covered World War 2----------- (7, 6)
William Shirer 24. Author of the outstanding award-winning two-part biography of Adolf Hitler titled ''Hubris' and 'Nemesis'------------- (3, 7)
Ian Kershaw

Down
1. Governor General during the partition of Bengal------------- (6)
Curzon 2. India's defence minister under Nehru famous for lapse during Indo-China war----- (7, 5)
Krishna Menon 3. Led French forces against Germany in Nazi-occupied France in World War 2-------- (2, 6)
de Gaulle 4. British police officer shot by mistake by Bhagat Singh and Rajguru---------- (7)
Saunders 6. Israeli PM during the Munch Olympic massacre----------- (5, 4)
Golda Meir 7. Commanded Operation Bluestar in 1984----------------- (2, 4)
KS Brar 9. Town over which Pan American flight was bombed in 1988--------------- (9)
Lockerbie 10. Hanged at TIhar Jail after assassinating Indira Gandhi--------------- (7, 5)
Satwant SIngh 11. Port city in Norway where the Germans first landed during their 'blitzkreig' campaign-------------- (9)
Trondheim 13. 'The Desert Fox" - agreed to commit suicide after being found involved in campaign to eliminate Hitler-------------- (5, 6)
Erwin Rommel 16. Communist faction founded by Lenin------------- (9)
Bolshevik 18. Encryption machine used by Nazi Germany in World War 2
------------- (6) Enigma 19. Japanese invasion of China also known as the 'Rape of ?'------------- (7)
Nanking 21. Scene of World War two's greatest evacuation--------------- (7)
Dunkirk

All two-word answers have a space between the two names
have fun !

The bane of mammon

Curse me if you like. Or call me naive. I stick to my guns that money (material wealth) is the bane of existence. At least an indulgence or excessive importance given to the accumulation of money most definitely is. I have, for years now, noticed how Indian society in particular seems to judge people only by the amount of wealth he/she possesses and care very little for any other personality traits. First question when some random person meets you or your family member at some gathering: What's your son doing? where does he work? Depending on the answer, the next question follows. If the answer is A, B or C (software firms) as is most likely the case considering how stereotypical we Indians are on an average (no offense again), then the reply will be highly 'encouraging'. "Excellent madam, he will get an excellent pay and promotion soon. Will be an ideal candidate once it comes to the bride search blah blah blah". In the highly unlikely event of the parent mentioning a non IT job, the happiness vanishes and is followed by statements that question the choice of job or worse still, sneers in other groups about what a grave mistake the boy has made in not doing what pays well, or as i prefer to see it as (what everybody does anyway).

Nowhere is the love of money, the material wealth and greed for more of the same manifested than in Indian marriages. What is purely meant to be a logical extension of mutual love and admiration of a couple is far from that. The entire process of marriage is now a money-laundering business, and while deploring it is not my intention anyway, I would hardly be getting my point across if I do not expose the scum that lies beneath the well-refined exterior.

There may have been Sanskrit sayings that spoke in glowing terms about knowledge as being the purest of all pursuits ("swadeshe poojyate raja, vidhwan sarvatra poojyate or "vidya dadati vinayam" etc). While I still concur and will continue to do so, the relevance of all this seems to be lost in a society which is increasingly filled with hypocrites. For them though, wealth suddenly becomes important when it comes to marriage scenarios. In other times, they try to don the garb of individuals who denounced wealth and speak eloquently about how important morals are and how trivial money is. Where did the very same morals go when it is time for the marriage of their sons and daughters? This hypocrisy breeds contempt and jealousy but very little love. Why can't a person meet a prospective partner, spend time, get to know his/her nature, appreciate the finer aspects of the character that are products of both the genes and nurture? Instead, salaries and jobs are used as filters in a society that claims to be at the forefront in advances and rational thinking. If this is not the definition of hypocrisy, nothing else is. While I would be the last person to attack astrology or the other empirical sciences that play an important role in the entire matrimony process, I can't help but believe that the horoscope is being used as an alibi to mask the real underlying reason for rejection. People and society in general would be much better off if the prospective partners are allowed to spend time and make their own decision on whether they want to proceed further. This eliminates any ambiguity and leaves very little room for assumptions.

Money is important and much more than I can ever envisage. But like most materials, an over-indulgence is undoubtedly malevolent. We as a well-informed and educated generation would do better if we focus on what brings more lasting happiness than on something that is ephemeral. If money indeed was what mattered to my best friends, I would not have survived the last few years. Their help and encouragement during trying times has not just changed my approach towards material wealth, but has also created an awareness in me that I should enjoy and appreciate the innate qualities that make people wonderful human beings and not the facade that material wealth creates.