Search Results

1. 9-year-old Vishnu* vacillates between 7, 8, and 9 for the answer to 3+4. 2. 13-year-old Fathima* recites the contents of her Geography text by heart, but she thinks the subject is ‘apne daere se bahaar’ (beyond her scope). 3. 15-year-old Aman* is expected to know elementary algebra to take his Boards\ examinations, but he cannot comprehend the English statements to construct the equations. *Names changed Like any other teenager, I was under the assumption that the public schooling system in India is making a considerable headway; an illusion primarily fostered by media’s portrayal of encouraging growth in school-enrollment rates every quarter year. During the ephemeral course of interactions with children of karamcharis of college, who I met through Social Service League’s Evening Classes initiative, I realized that the lower league school systems in India are plagued with several systemic issues, and India is failing many of the country’s poorest children. Be it Arithmetic, Grammar, History, Chemistry, Algebra- learning is by rote. I was aghast at how a 10th Grader was impressing solutions to Math problems on her memory (since she was told that she must resort to it to get ‘ache number’ in exams). I asked her why she doesn’t ask her teacher when she cannot grasp a concept, to which came the pat reply, “Ek toh woh Eid ka chaand hai. Aur jab woh aati hain bacchon ke sawaal nahi sunti.’ (One, we get to see her once in a blue moon, and when she comes, she never listens to our questions). The last straw however was her teacher’s notes that declared ‘Sin and Cos and trigonmatric (Spellcheck: trigonometric) angles’. This summarizes the debacle of our education system. The primary school enrollment rate is at its peak at a staggering 95%. This is unequivocally a commendable feat considering that on the eve of independence the literacy rate in India stood at a paltry 12%. The surge in enrollment is because of the impact of consummate policy decisions, both on the legislative and programmatic front. The Midday Meal Scheme has incentivized parents to send their children to schools, school fees are entirely or partially waived, easing the financial strain on parents. The Right to Education Act, enshrined in Article 21-A of the Constitution which came into effect on 1st April 2010, has upheld the right to full-time, free, and quality elementary education as a fundamental child right. However, the spurt in enrollment rates is a delusive metric of socio-economic progress, at least in the Indian context, and it would be expedient to get hoodwinked by the impressive statistics. Burgeoning enrollment rates are not necessarily an indicator of the education coverage. The other side of the story is the grim reality in which one child in every five primary school going children drop out. Only two out of three children of this age attend school regularly. Of course, there are several other socio-demographic variables at play here; child malnutrition, for instance, linked to cognitive deficits and stunted growth including other devastating consequences has intervening effects on attendance levels. Teacher absenteeism is a crucial concern. Impromptu visits to government schools hint that 25% of the workforce is absent from school on any given working day. Teacher absenteeism is often attributed to the lack of incentives for teachers in public schools. It also demoralizes students from attending school and hampers the learning process. A substantial proportion of teachers in publicly funded schools are ill-trained. The standard of teaching is unsatisfactory. Pedagogical strategies endorse a ‘Drill and Kill’ policy over fostering an environment conducive to meaningful learning. Discussing meaningful learning is probably a tad far-fetched in chaotic classrooms teeming with students of different grades. “Saans lene ki bhi jagah nahi hoti” (there is no place to even breathe), says the 15-year-old. Through the creation of such unpropitious conditions, the quality of education imparted is being compromised upon. A 5th Grader failing at basic arithmetic, a 6th Grader stuttering with simple English sentences or an 8th Grader unable to comprehend the idea of squares of numbers, is testament to the abysmal quality of education delivered in these schools. Comprehensive reports by NGOs like Pratham suggest that about 78% of grade 3 students and 50% of grade 5 students cannot read textbooks designed for Second-Graders. Out of 144 million children studying in 7,14,000 publicly funded schools in India, more than half cannot read simple English or recognize numbers beyond 99. The pertinent concern of education inequity, or the inequity in the distribution of academic resources remains insufficiently addressed and overlooked. There is a consensus that presence of inequalities undermines the spirit of democracy; banishing differential access to resources is pivotal to the smooth functioning of our democratic order. This could prove detrimental to the economic health of the nation as it poses an essential threat to sustenance of growth rates and impedes on the efficacy of policy measures. The inequity in the distribution of educational resources has far-reaching political and economic implications. Dr. B. R. Ambedkar, in his speech to the Constituent Assembly on November 25th, 1949 forewarned about the prevalence of structured inequalities which could jeopardize the existence of the social order when he said, “We are going to enter into a life of contradictions. In politics, we will have equality in social and economic rights, we will have inequality…we must remove this contradiction at the earliest possible moment or else those who suffer from inequality will blow up the structure of political democracy which this Assembly has so laboriously built up.” It has been recognized that education serves the potential to be a democratizing force by reconciling socio-economic disparities in a society highly stratified by caste and class. However, the deplorable state of public education is perilous to the democratic fabric of the nation as it reinforces social contrariety that are to be imperatively exterminated and is also a roadblock in the eradication of poverty. India has one of the youngest age profiles in the world and by 2030, the median age of the population is likely to be 31.2 years. The demographic dividend, which is touted to give India an edge over other developing nations could yield catastrophic results if the economy fails to create around 12 million jobs annually for the new entrants into the labour market. The opportunities created by the demographic dividend need to be harnessed efficiently for the country to propel growth, employment, and prosperity. The dearth of skill in India’s labour force stemming primarily from the pitfalls in the education system, which is ill equipped to meet the increasing demand for skilled or semi-skilled human resources could erode the asset of a youthful population into a social, economic, and political liability. Bridging these socio-economic differences to pave way for a society characterized by an equitable distribution of resources should be the foremost priority of development. In U.S educator Felix E Schelling’s words, “True education makes for inequality; the inequality of individuality, the inequality of success, the glorious inequality of talent, of genius; for inequality, not mediocrity, individual superiority, not standardization, is the measure of the progress of the world.” How long before the liberating force of true education can emancipate us from the shackles of caste, class, creed, religion, or gender? Is India really incapacitated that the basic human right of quality education is perceived as an extravagance for the country’s most impoverished? Here I enclose with an excerpt from Stephen Spender’s poignant poem An Elementary School Classroom in a Slum: “This map becomes their window and these windows That shut upon their lives like catacombs, Break O break open till they break the town And show the children to green fields, and make their world Run azure on gold sands, and let their tongues Run naked into books the white and green leaves open History theirs whose language is the sun.”

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. The Forum interviewed the newly elected President of the Students’ Union Society, Konda Sai Aashirvad on 13th September, 2017. The interview was administered by the First Year SF team consisting of Rajat Chandra Mishra, Adreeta Chakraborty, Pranay Krishna, Nitya Chopra, and Sunish Bansal. The team was headed by our Core Team Editor, Ayushi Jha. Read on to know what to expect from the Union this academic year. 1. Before​ ​we​ ​talk​ ​about​ ​your​ ​plans​ ​in​ ​the​ ​future​ ​as​ ​ President​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Student​ ​Union,​ ​tell​ ​us​ ​what​ ​you think​ ​made​ ​you​ ​stand​ ​out​ ​during​ ​the​ ​election​ ​campaign.​ ​What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​contributed​  ​most to​ ​your​ ​majority​ ​victory? I​ ​didn’t​ ​expect​ ​that​ ​I​ ​would​ ​win​ ​by​ ​such​ ​a​ ​majority​ ​because​ ​the​ ​competition​ ​was​ ​tough.​ ​The​ ​margin of​ ​188​ ​votes​ ​was​ ​huge.​ ​And​ ​when​ ​I​ ​come​ ​to​ ​think​ ​of ​​what​ ​made​ ​this​ ​possible,​ ​I​ ​realize​ ​that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​my team​ ​that​ ​has​ ​mainly​ ​contributed​ ​to​ ​my​ ​victory.​ ​It​ ​ consists​ ​of​ ​mostly ​Second​ ​and​ ​Third​ ​Years​ ​who have​ ​been​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Union​ ​for​ ​the​ ​past​ ​two​ ​years,​ ​have​ ​been​ ​a​ ​part​ ​of​ ​many​ ​other​ ​societies​ ​and​ ​have represented​ ​the​ ​college​ ​in​ ​various​ ​forms.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​also​ apprehensive​ ​if​ ​practicality​ ​in​ ​the​ ​manifesto​ ​will work,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​did​ ​turn​ ​out​ ​to​ ​do​ ​so​ ​in​ ​our​ ​favour.​ ​We​ ​planned​ ​it​ ​really​ ​well​ ​and​ ​our​ ​experience​ ​did​ ​work out​ ​for​ ​us. 2. Many first years are​ ​curious about​ ​the​ ​powers​ ​of​ ​the​ ​SUS​.​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​think the​ ​college​ ​gives​ ​a​ ​significant​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​power​ ​to​ ​the ​ ​SUS?​ ​A​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​people​ ​say​ ​that​ ​it’s​ ​just​ ​an event​ ​organizing​ ​committee. The​ ​SUS​ ​doesn’t​ ​really​ ​have​ ​many​ ​powers,​ ​to​ ​be​ ​honest.​ ​It’s​ ​just​ ​like​ ​any​ ​other​ ​society,​ ​but​ ​with elected representation.​ ​In​ ​matters​ ​that​ ​require​ ​attention,​ ​you​ ​write​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Principal​ ​as​ ​President​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Student Union.​ ​The​ ​answer​ ​might​ ​be​ ​yes​ ​or​ ​no,​ ​but​ ​you​ ​have​ ​the​ ​right​ ​to​ ​approach.​ ​How​ ​you​ ​take​ ​it​ ​up​ ​is​ ​a different​ ​case.​ ​At​ ​the​ ​same​ ​time​ ​you’re​ ​backed​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Staff​ ​Adviser.​​​ ​In​ ​that​ ​sense,​ ​we​ ​don’t​ ​have many​ ​powers​ ​unless​ ​and​ ​until​ ​we​ ​decide​ ​to​ ​mobilize​ ​the ​entire​ ​student​ ​body​ ​to​ ​come​ ​and​ ​promote​ ​a particular​ ​cause.​ ​Last​ ​year,​ ​we​ ​did​ ​see​ ​that​ ​happening. 3. The​ ​Common​ ​Freshers​ ​is​ ​something​ ​you’ve​ ​started​ ​this​ ​year.​ ​How​ ​will​ ​you​ ​finance​ ​it? Last​ ​year​ ​there​ ​was​ ​a​ ​Resident’s​ ​Freshers​ ​and​ ​a​ ​movie​ ​screening.​ ​We​ ​wanted​ ​to​ ​continue​ ​with​ ​the idea,​ ​and​ ​decided​ ​to​ ​expand​ ​it​ ​for​ ​Day​ ​Scholars​ ​as​ ​ well.​ ​It’ll​ ​be​ ​a​ ​get​ ​together​ ​of​ ​sorts.​ ​There​ ​will​ ​be performances​ ​by​ ​some​ ​enthusiastic​ ​first​ ​years.​ ​We​ ​have​ some​ ​money​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Fund​ ​which​ ​will​ ​be utilized​ ​to​ ​get​ ​refreshments, if at all. 4. There​ ​was​ ​a​ ​point​ ​in​ ​your​ ​manifesto​ ​which​ ​was​ ​greatly​ ​appreciated​ ​by​ ​the​ ​residents​ ​owing​ ​to​ ​the Delhi​ ​Heat.​ ​You​ ​proposed​ ​that​ ​Rooms​ ​A,​ ​B​ ​and​ ​C​ ​be​ ​ kept​ ​open​ ​till​ ​10 PM.​ ​The​ ​college​ ​isn’t​ ​willing​ ​to extend​ ​the​ ​library​ ​timings​ ​by​ ​an​ ​hour.​ ​The​ ​extra​ ​hours ​​of​ ​operation​ ​will​ ​certainly​ ​add​ ​to​ ​the​ ​bill.​ ​Do you​ ​think​ ​the​ ​Bursar​ ​will​ ​be​ ​in​ ​favor​ ​of​ ​this​ ​proposition? The​ ​library​ ​timings​ ​are​ ​not​ ​being​ ​extended​ ​because​ ​of​ ​staff​ ​members. ​ ​According​ ​to​ ​UGC​ ​guidelines, staff​ ​members​ ​can​ ​stay​ ​in​ ​college​ ​only​ ​till​ ​a​ ​specific ​time​ ​i.e.​ ​5​ ​pm.​ ​If​ ​they​ ​stay​ ​later​ ​than​ ​that, ​ ​the college​ ​has​ ​to​ ​pay. ​ ​Moreover,​ ​the​ ​staff​ ​members​ ​are​ ​ not​ ​willing​ ​to​ ​stay​ ​in​ ​college​ ​after​ ​that. So​ ​opening​ ​either​ ​of​ ​the​ ​rooms-​ ​A, ​ ​B,​ ​and​ ​C​ ​is​ ​an​ ​alternative​ ​to​ ​this. As​ ​far​ ​as​ ​the​ ​AC​ ​bill​ ​is​ ​concerned, ​ ​it​ ​will​ ​not​ really​ ​add​ ​substantially​ ​to​ ​the​ ​current​ ​expenses​ ​as​ ​some rooms​ ​are​ ​already​ ​open​ ​for​ ​Evening​ ​Classes.​ ​It​ ​should​ ​be​ ​manageable.​ ​The​ ​staff​ ​adviser​ ​has​ ​already approved​ ​of​ ​this​ ​proposition.​ ​We​ ​are​ ​still​ ​waiting​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Principal’s​ ​approval. 5. The​ ​manifestos​ ​of​ ​the​ ​other​ ​two​ ​candidates​ ​were​ seen​ ​as​ ​largely​ ​similar​ ​since​ ​everyone​ ​was striving to​ ​promote​ the ​greater​ ​good​ ​of​ ​Stephania.​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​plan​ ​to​ ​incorporate​ ​their​ ​suggestions​ ​as​ ​well? How? Yes,​ ​definitely.​ ​I​ ​read​ ​both​ ​their​ ​manifestos.​ ​In​ ​fact,​ ​I​ ​asked​ ​the​ ​other​ ​two​ ​candidates​ ​if​ ​they’d​ ​like​ ​to be​ ​a​ ​part​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Union.​ ​Apparently,​ ​one​ ​of​ ​them​ ​refused.​ ​The​ ​other​ ​candidate​ ​did​ ​say​ ​that​ ​people from​ ​his​ ​camp​ ​are​ ​interested,​ ​but​ ​refused​ ​so​ ​at​ ​a​​ later​ ​date.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​ready​ ​to​ ​work​ ​with​ ​them,​ ​but​ ​they didn’t​ ​show​ ​any​ ​interest.​ ​I​ ​did​ ​my​ ​part​ ​by​ ​asking​ ​them. But​ ​it’s​ ​great​ ​to​ ​see​ ​that​ ​Second​ ​Years​ ​from​ ​different​ ​camps​ ​have​ ​applied​ ​to​ ​be​ ​a​ ​part​ ​of​ ​our​ ​Union. This​ ​is​ ​something​ ​that​ ​didn’t​ ​happen​ ​last​ ​year. 6. Last​ ​year​ ​the​ ​elected​ ​Student​ ​Council​ ​had​ ​two​ ​meetings​ ​throughout​ ​the​ ​year,​ ​indicating​ ​the minimal​ ​role​ ​that​ ​they​ ​play​ ​in​ ​the​ ​college.​ ​Why​ ​do​ ​ you​ ​think​ ​this​ ​is​ ​so?​ ​ The​ ​Constitution​ ​says​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Union​ ​should​ ​have​ ​regular​ ​meetings,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​does​ ​not​ ​specify how​ ​many.​ ​It​ ​gets​ ​difficult​ ​for​ ​Staff​ ​Advisers​ ​and​ ​all ​the​ ​Executive​ ​Council​ ​members​ ​to​ ​come​ ​together due​ ​to​ ​differences​ ​in​ ​their​ ​schedules. So,​ ​we​ ​usually​ ​meet​ ​once​ ​in​ ​the​ ​odd​ ​semester,​ ​and​ ​ maybe​ ​twice​ ​in​ ​the​ ​even​ ​semester,​ ​before​ ​and after​ ​Harmony​ ​to​ ​present​ ​the​ ​budget.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​not​ ​good​ ​practice,​ ​of​ ​course.​ ​This​ ​year​ ​we​ ​plan​ ​to consult​ ​the​ ​Executive​ ​Council​ ​before​ ​taking​ ​all​ ​major​​ decisions-​ ​opening​ ​the​ ​SUS​ ​link,​ ​holding​ ​major events,​ ​etc.​ ​It​ ​might​ ​take​ ​some​ ​more​ ​time,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​is​ ​the​ ​approach​ ​we​ ​want​ ​to​ ​adopt.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​past, there​ ​has​ ​been​ ​a​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​communication​ ​between​ ​the​ ​Executive​ ​Council​ ​and​ the ​Student​ ​Union.​ ​Better coordination​ ​will​ ​help​ ​both​ ​of​ ​us.​ ​As​ ​our​ ​teams​ ​are​ ​ diversified,​ ​we​ ​have​ ​a​ ​right​ ​to​ ​inform​ ​and​ ​be informed.​ ​It’s​ ​also​ ​important​ ​that​ ​the​ ​first​ ​years​ ​get​ ​to​ ​know​ ​how​ ​things​ ​are​ ​done​ ​because​ ​they’ll have​ ​to​ ​handle​ ​such​ ​tasks​ ​in​ ​the​ ​future. 7. Your​ ​manifesto​ ​promised​ ​creation​ ​of​ ​many​ ​committees-​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Mess,​ ​Cafe,​ ​Academic​ ​Cell,​ ​etc.​ ​How will​ ​the​ ​members​ ​of​ ​such​ ​committees​ ​be​ ​chosen? Committees​ ​usually​ ​constitute of​ ​students​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Second​ ​and ​Third​ ​Year.​ ​So​ ​we​ ​have​ ​been​ ​circulating google​ ​forms​ ​for​ ​interested​ ​students​ ​to​ ​volunteer.​ ​Many​ ​people​ ​have​ ​done​ ​so,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​committees will​ ​be​ ​formed​ ​as​ ​per​ ​their​ ​preference.​ ​​We​ ​do​ ​not​ ​ have​ ​a​ ​recruitment​ ​criteria​ ​as​ ​such.​ ​Whoever​ ​is willing​ ​to​ ​work​ ​and​ ​has​ ​volunteered,​ ​will​ ​be​ ​given​ ​the ​ ​opportunity​ ​to​ ​work​ ​for​ ​the​ ​college.​ ​That’s​ ​the plan. After​ ​that​ ​is​ ​done,​ ​we​ ​will​ ​gather​ ​suggestions​ ​and​ ​ ideas​ ​from​ ​all​ ​students,​ ​again​ ​via​ ​Google​ ​forms,​ ​and the​ ​same​ ​will​ ​be​ ​put​ ​forward​ ​to​ ​the​ ​administration​ ​by​ ​the​ ​concerned​ ​committees.​ ​As​ ​discussion follows,​ ​we​ ​put​ ​forward​ ​our​ ​points,​ ​the​ ​administration​ ​ states​ ​its​ ​concerns​ ​and​ ​we​ ​try​ ​to​ ​reach​ ​a conclusion​ ​as​ ​to​ ​what​ ​is​ ​feasible. Take for​ ​example,​ ​the​ ​café​ ​menu.​ ​Students​ ​suggest​ ​that​ ​they​ ​want​ ​all​ ​kinds​ ​of​ ​juices,​ ​shakes,​ ​noodles,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​is​ ​not​ ​feasible.​ ​Moreover,​ ​the​ ​college​ ​does​​ not​ ​want​ ​privatization​ ​of​ ​the​ ​café,​ ​which​ ​is understandable.​ ​So​ ​we​ ​can​ ​ask​ ​for​ ​a​ ​greater​ ​but​​ limited​ ​variety​ ​of​ ​options,​ ​something​ ​which​ ​is do-able.​ ​We’ll​ ​be​ ​circulating​ ​the​ ​forms​ ​soon​ ​so​ ​that​ ​ each​ ​student​ ​has​ ​the​ ​opportunity​ ​to​ ​send​ ​in​ ​their preferences. 8. You​ ​proposed​ ​an​ ​elected​ ​representative​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Ladies Common Room.​ ​What​ ​will​ ​the​ ​election​ ​process​ ​for​ ​that​ ​look like?​ And​ ​what​ ​will​ ​the​ ​representative’s​ ​powers​ ​be? We​ ​had​ ​elections​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Junior Common Room​ ​Representative.​ ​For​​ the​ ​LCR​ ​Representative,​ ​it​ ​will​ ​happen​ ​along​ ​the same​ ​lines.​ ​Voters​ ​will​ ​be​ ​lady​ ​day-scholars,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​nominations​ ​will​ ​be​ ​accepted​ ​only​ ​from​ ​Third Year​ ​lady​ ​day-scholars.​ ​The representative will ensure​ ​that ​​she​ ​is​ ​in​ ​touch​ ​with​ ​the​ ​person​ ​sitting​ ​in​ ​the​ ​LCR and​ ​the​ ​Estate​ ​Office,​ ​so​ ​that​ ​they​ ​can​ ​work​ ​together​ ​to​ ​resolve​ ​any​ ​issues​ ​that​ ​arise. Someone​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Union​ ​could​ ​have​ ​also​ ​done​ ​the​ ​job​ but​ ​if​ ​we​ ​have​ ​one​ ​person​ ​who​ ​is​ ​specifically enthusiastic​ ​about​ ​the​ ​position​​ ​and​ ​ wants​ ​to​ ​take​ ​it​ ​up,​ ​it​ ​makes​ ​more​ ​sense. We​ ​want​ ​to​ ​get​ ​more​ ​things​ ​in​ ​the​ ​LCR.​ ​Right​ ​now,​ ​ I​ ​won’t​ ​spell​ ​out​ ​all​ ​that​ ​we​ ​plan​ ​to​ ​do.​ ​If​ ​ things​ ​go well,​ ​we​ ​will​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​provide​​ ​a​ ​sanitary​ ​napkin​ ​dispenser​ ​as​ ​promised. 9. One​ ​of​ ​the​ ​winning​ ​points​ ​of​ ​your​ ​Manifesto​ ​was​ ​the​ E-library.​ ​What​ ​is​ ​going​ ​to​ ​be​ ​your​ ​plan​ ​of action​ ​to​ ​initiate​ ​this? A​ ​system​ ​to​ ​facilitate​ ​this​ ​already​ ​exists​ ​but​ ​the​ ​student​ ​community​ ​is​ ​unaware.​ ​We​ ​will​ ​give​ ​each​ ​CR a​ ​form​ ​which​ ​needs​ ​to​ ​be​ ​filled​ ​by​ ​all​ ​students.​ ​The ​ ​form​ ​will​ ​include​ ​some​ ​basic​ ​details.​ ​The​ ​librarian will​ ​mail​ ​everyone​ ​their​ ​account​ ​IDs​ ​and​ ​passwords.​ ​With ​ ​that​ ​account​ ​you’ll​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​access e-libraries​ ​of​ ​universities​ ​like​ ​Cambridge,​ ​Stanford,​ ​etc​. ​which​ ​are​ ​free​ ​of​ ​cost,​ ​and​ ​you​ ​can​ ​download PDF​ ​versions.​ ​You​ ​can​ ​access​ ​the​ ​Delhi​ ​University​ ​ library​ ​and​ ​check​ ​catalogue​ ​numbers​ ​for​ ​our​ ​college library​ ​as​ ​well. 10. Are​ ​you​ ​comfortable​ ​sharing​ ​your​ ​stance​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Autonomy​ ​issue? Yes,​ ​I​ ​am​ ​quite​ ​comfortable​ ​talking​ ​about​ ​the​ ​issue.​ ​The​ ​students​ ​did​ ​not​ ​say​ ​whether​ ​seeking​ ​the autonomy​ ​status​ ​was​ ​right​ ​or​ ​wrong,​ ​or​ ​whether​ ​they​​ were​ ​against​ ​it.​ ​All​ ​they​ ​wanted​ ​was​ ​a democratic​ ​process​ ​of​ ​debate​ ​and​ ​deliberation.​ ​As​ ​a​ student​ ​of​ ​Political​ ​Science​ ​myself,​ ​I​ ​too​ ​feel​ ​that discussions​ ​should’ve​ ​taken​ ​place.​ ​I​ ​have​ ​read​ ​a​ ​couple​ ​of​ ​ articles​ ​about​ ​the​ ​same​ ​and​ ​tried​ ​to understand​ ​the​ ​extent​ ​to​ ​which​ ​it​ ​will​ ​affect​ ​everyone.​ ​If​ ​Autonomy​ ​comes​ ​in​ ​a​ ​way​ ​that​ ​it​ ​does​ ​not affect​ ​the​ ​finances​ ​of​ ​the​ ​college,​ ​the​ ​karamcharis,​ ​etc ​ ​then​ ​it’s​ ​a​ ​good​ ​thing.​ ​Moreover,​ ​if​ ​the government​ ​is​ ​imposing it,​ ​there​ ​is​ ​little​ ​we​ ​can​ ​do. I​ ​had​ ​this​ ​discussion​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Bursar​, who said​ ​that​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​new​ ​notification​ ​which specifies​ ​that​ ​the​ ​existing​ ​staff,​ ​the​ ​recruiting​ ​staff,​ ​the​ ​present​ ​batch​ ​of​ ​students​ ​and​ ​the​ ​next​ ​new batch​ ​coming​ ​in​ ​won’t​ ​be​ ​affected​ ​until​ ​and​ ​unless​ ​the ​college​ ​decides​ ​to​ ​introduce​ ​a​ ​new​ ​course. So,​ ​if​ ​the​ ​college​ ​were​ ​to​ ​introduce​ ​a​ ​new​ ​department, ​​say​ ​Political​ ​Science,​ ​then​ ​they​ ​have​ ​complete discretion​ ​to​ ​decide​ ​the​ ​fees​ ​for​ ​that​ ​particular​ ​course ​ ​only.​ ​But​ ​as​ ​of​ ​now,​ ​our​ ​college​ ​doesn’t​ ​plan​ ​to do​ ​anything​ ​along​ ​those​ ​lines. The​ ​new​ ​notification​ ​also​ ​says​ ​that​ ​the​ ​University Grants Commission​ ​will​ ​ continue​ ​to​ ​fund​ ​the​ ​college​ ​for​ ​all​ ​existing​ ​courses, as​ ​it​ ​has​ ​till​ ​date. 11. Currently​ ​our​ ​college’s​ ​Union​ ​is​ ​formed​ ​by​ ​electing​ ​the​ ​President​ ​and​ ​the​ ​rest​ ​of​ ​the​ ​team​ ​is​ ​formed at​ ​the​ ​President’s​ ​discretion. ​What​ ​is​ ​your​ ​view​ ​on​ ​a​ ​single​ ​individual​ ​holding​ ​such​ ​power? When​ ​we​ ​say​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Union​ ​doesn’t​ ​have​ ​power,​ ​we​ can’t​ ​say​ ​that​ ​the​ ​President​ ​has​ ​all​ ​the​ ​power. Even​ ​the​ ​constitution​ ​supports​ ​this​ ​statement.​ ​There​ ​is​​ one​ ​elected​ ​member,​ ​the​ ​President,​ ​who​ ​can select​ ​his​ ​own​ ​cabinet. It’s​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​responsibility​ ​for​ ​me, and​ ​will​ ​be​ ​throughout​ the​ ​year.​ ​But​ ​at​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​the​ ​day,​ ​it’s​ ​‘Students’ Union​ ​Society’.​ ​So​ ​we​ ​have​ ​to​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​guidelines​ ​as​ ​other​ ​societies​ ​do.​ ​Each​ ​society​ ​has​ ​a President,​ ​a​ ​Vice​ ​President​ ​and​ ​Vertical​ ​Heads,​ ​all​ ​selected​ ​on​ ​basis​ ​of​ ​merit.​ ​The​ ​same​ ​goes​ ​with​ ​the Union.​ ​It​ ​has​ ​different​ ​committees.​ ​All​ ​third​ ​years​ ​and​ ​second​ ​years​ ​work​ ​at​ ​the​ ​same​ ​level. 12. On​ ​the​ ​day​ ​of​ ​Open​ ​Court,​ ​someone​ ​raised​ ​an​ ​allegation ​regarding​​ ​promotion of​ ​regionalism​ ​in college by your camp.​ ​What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​say​ ​to​ ​that? The​ ​debate​ ​about​ ​regionalism​ ​is​ ​going​ ​on​ ​since​ ​last​ ​year. ​I​ ​really​ ​don’t​ ​know​ ​why​ ​they​ ​think​ ​that​ ​I promoted​ ​regionalism. One​ ​of​ ​my​ ​best​ ​friends​ ​was​ ​stopped​ ​by​ ​a​ ​person​ ​from​ ​another​ ​camp​ ​while​ ​he​ ​was​ ​walking​, ​and​ ​asked who​ ​he​ ​would​ ​vote​ ​for.​ ​When​ ​he​ ​replied​ ​with​ ​my​ ​name, ​they​ ​asked​ ​him​ ​why​ ​he​ ​was​ ​voting​ ​for​ ​a South​ ​Indian,​ ​being​ ​from​ ​North​ ​India. During​ ​Open​ ​Court,​ ​they​ ​started​ ​accusing​ ​me​ ​of​ regionalism​ ​and​ ​showed​ ​some​ ​messages.​ ​Those messages​ ​were​ ​related​ ​to​ ​“mallu​ ​ragging”​ ​and​ ​had no​ connection​ ​to​ ​my​ ​campaign​ ​at​ ​all.​ ​I​ ​could​ ​actually show​ ​that​ ​I​ ​have​ ​a​ ​more​ ​diversified​ ​team​ ​than​ ​the​ ​ other​ ​two​ ​camps​ ​but​ ​I​ ​did​ ​not​ ​want​ ​to​ ​use​ ​the regionalism​ ​card​ ​on​ ​the​ ​day​ ​of​ ​Open​ ​Court. 13. You​ ​have​ ​worked​ ​under​ ​two ​different​ ​presidents.​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​ feel​ ​the​ ​need​ ​to​ ​differentiate​ ​yourself​ ​from them? Elections in my First Year​ ​were​ ​quite​ ​funny​ ​because​ ​there​ ​was​ ​only​ ​one​ ​candidate​ ​standing​ ​for elections.​ ​Later​ ​she​ ​resigned,​ ​and​ ​a​ ​person​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Executive​ ​Council​ ​took​ ​charge.​ ​I​ ​mostly​ ​worked​ ​with my​ ​Second​ ​Years​ ​then​ ​which​ ​was​ ​a​ ​really​ ​good​ ​experience.​ ​Coming​ ​to​ ​last​ ​year’s​ ​President,​ ​he​ ​took up​ ​some​ ​initiatives​ ​but​ ​those​ ​did​ ​not​ ​sustain.​ ​I​ ​ really​ ​have​ ​a​ ​great​ ​team​ ​that​ ​has​ ​my​ ​back.​ ​That​ ​is always​ ​been​ ​my​ ​strength.​ ​When​ ​results​ ​were​ ​announced,​ ​I​ ​was​ ​shocked​ ​to​ ​see​ ​such​ ​a​ ​huge​ ​majority. I​ ​feel​ ​more​ ​responsible​ ​after​ ​seeing​ ​such​ ​support​ ​for​ ​me. ​We​ ​might​ ​not​ ​end​ ​up​ ​doing​ ​great​ ​things​ ​but​ ​we​ hope to ​end​ ​up​ ​doing​ ​small ​things​, ​which ​the next​ ​batch​ can ​take​ ​up.​ ​We​ ​never​ ​take​ ​any​ ​one​ ​as​ ​our​ ​ideal​ ​president​ ​or​ ​ideal​ ​team.​ ​This​ ​year​ ​we​ ​want to be​ ​that​ ​ideal​ ​team​ ​which​ ​can​ ​really​ ​work​ ​for​ ​the​ ​ welfare​ ​of​ ​students​ ​and​ ​the​ ​college.​ ​These​ ​small things​ ​which​ ​we​ ​start​ ​now​ ​will​ ​definitely​ ​sustain​ ​when​ ​they​ ​are​ ​taken​ ​up​ ​by​ ​batches​ ​to​ ​come. 14. Are​ ​you​ ​a​ ​feminist?​ ​What​ ​do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​to​ ​say​ ​about​ the​ ​debates that​ ​sparked off​ ​over​ ​feminism​ ​after​ ​Open Court? I​ ​am​ ​a​ ​feminist.​ ​I​ ​don’t​ ​know​ ​much​ ​about​ ​the​ ​formal​ ​feminist​ ​theory​ ​but​ ​I​ ​believe​ ​in​ ​equality.​ ​There were​ ​many​ ​things​ that ​happened​ ​this​ ​year​ ​after​ ​open​ ​court.​ ​​​People​ ​from​ ​other​ ​camps​ ​started​ ​making memes​ ​about​ ​a​ ​lot​ ​of​ ​things which was meaningless. 15. You​ ​mention​ ​the​ ​Sexual​ ​Harassment​ ​Committee​ ​in​ ​the​ ​same​ ​breath​ ​as​ ​LCR,​ ​making​ ​it​ ​a​ ​gender specific​ ​requirement​ ​in​ ​some​ ​ways. What​ ​will​ ​the​ ​constitution​ ​and​ ​the​ ​mechanism​ ​look​ ​like?​ ​How​ ​soon​ ​we​ ​can​ ​expect​ ​it​ ​to be​ ​functional? On​ ​the​ ​day​ ​of​ ​open​ ​court,​ ​I​ ​had​ ​to​ ​cover​ ​many​ ​things​ ​under​ ​5​ ​minutes.​ ​I​ ​mentioned​ ​the​ ​Sexual Harassment​ ​Committee​ ​after​ ​LCR​ ​but​ ​I​ ​realize​ ​that​​ these​ ​two​ ​are​ ​separate​ ​bodies.​ ​I​ ​had​ ​a​ ​meeting with​ ​Joan​ recently​, ​who​ ​is​ ​involved​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Pinjra​ ​Tod​ ​movement.​ ​She​ ​would​ ​help​ ​me​ ​in​ ​further developments​ ​about​ ​the​ ​Committee​ ​since​ ​she​ ​particularly​ ​ knows​ ​when​ ​to​ ​have​ ​elections​ ​as mandated​ ​by​ ​the​ ​University.​ ​She​ ​said​ ​it​ ​would​ ​be​ ​ prudent​ ​to​ ​have​ ​an​ ​election​ ​at​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​the month​ ​so​ ​as​ ​to​ ​coincide​ ​with​ ​Pinjra​ ​Tod​ ​movement.​ ​They ​ ​will​ ​send​ ​a​ ​mail​ ​to​ ​each​ ​college representative​ ​to​ ​make​ ​sure​ ​that​ ​elections​ ​happened. ​ ​There​ ​will​ ​be​ ​one​ ​elected​ ​representative​ ​from​ ​the​ ​ students​ ​and​ ​two​ ​staff​ ​members.​ ​The​ ​Principal​ ​will not​ ​be​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Committee.​ ​So​ ​you​ ​can​ ​bring​ ​up​ ​an​ ​ issue​ ​against​ ​anyone,​ ​even​ ​the​ ​Principal.​ ​The present​ ​faculty​ ​member​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Committee​ ​is​ ​not​ ​active. This​ ​year​ ​we​ ​will​ ​have​ ​elections​ ​so​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Committee ​is​ ​more​ ​pro-active and​ ​the​ ​elected representatives​ ​have​ ​a​ ​sense​ ​of​ ​responsibility. Apart​ ​from​ ​this,​ ​we​ ​are​ ​planning​ ​to​ ​have​ ​a​ ​student​ ​counselling​ ​cell.​ ​We​ ​hope​ ​this​ ​will​ ​give​ ​mental support​ ​to​ ​the​ ​students. 16. Do​ ​you​ ​have​ ​plans​ ​to​ ​reintroduce​ ​the​ ​Principal’s​ ​ Tree? I​ ​am​ ​really​ ​not​ ​up​ ​for​ ​it​ ​considering​ ​how​ ​it​​ backfired​ ​last​ ​year​, ​but​ ​it​ ​depends.​ ​There​ ​were​ ​many​​ issues that​ ​were​ ​raised​ ​on​ ​that​ ​day​ ​last​ ​year.​ ​The​ ​curfew​​ issue​ ​was​ ​raised​ ​and​ ​the Principal​ ​asked​ ​us​ ​to​ ​make​ ​plans​ ​for an​ ​open​ ​campus.​ ​We​ ​made​ ​the​ ​plans​ ​but​ ​all​ ​our​ ​work​ ​was​ ​in​ ​vain. 17.What​ ​is​ ​your​ ​take​ ​on​ ​open​ ​campus​ ​and​ ​curfew​ ​situations ​in​ ​campus​ ​now? 10​ ​PM​ ​is​ ​very​ ​restrictive.​ ​​We​ ​can​ ​make​ ​it​ ​an​ ​open ​campus​ ​and​ ​restrict​ ​the​ ​entry​ ​of​ ​outsiders​ ​to ensure​ ​safety.​ ​We​ ​can​ ​also​ ​propose​ ​to​ ​extend​ ​the​ ​ curfew.​ ​I​ ​know​ ​for​ ​the​ ​boys,​ ​curfew​ ​is​ ​not​ ​strict. We​ ​can​ ​take​ ​up​ ​this​ ​issue,​ ​make​ ​a​ ​plan​ ​and​ ​put​ ​it​ ​before​ ​Principal.​ ​It’s​ ​up​ ​to​ ​him​ ​to​ ​accept​ ​it​ ​or​ ​not but​ ​the​ ​plan​ ​should​ ​be​ ​clear​ ​and​ ​convincing.​ ​I​ ​don’t​ ​know​ ​if​ ​everyone​ ​is​ ​fine​ ​with​ ​open​ ​campus​ ​or extending​ ​the​ ​curfew​ ​timings.​ ​I​ ​don’t​ ​think​ ​we​ ​are​ ​not ​ ​safe​ ​after​ ​10.​ ​If​ ​you​ ​are​ ​safe​ ​till​ ​10,​ ​you​ ​will​ ​be safe​ ​after​ ​10​ ​also.​ ​I​ ​also​ ​know​ ​there​ ​are​ ​many​ ​other ​ ​issues​ ​faced​ ​by​ ​residence​ ​students​ ​like application​ ​for​ ​night​ ​outs.​ ​Also​ ​different​ ​blocks​ ​have​ different​ ​rules​ ​so​ ​these​ ​are​ ​things​ ​that​ ​need​ ​to be​ ​changed. 18. So​ ​the​ ​elections​ ​were​ ​held​ ​on​ ​30​th​​ ​August.​​ ​Not​ ​a​ ​significant​ ​amount​ ​of​ ​time​ ​for you​ ​to​ ​start​ ​working​ ​on​ ​your​ ​promises,​ ​but​ ​how​ ​has​ ​ it​ ​been​ ​so​ ​far? In​ ​order​ ​to​ ​declare​ ​my​ ​Cabinet​ ​and​ ​second-year​ ​Council,​ ​the​ ​Executive​ ​Council​ ​results​ ​have​ ​to​ ​be​ ​out because​ ​some​ ​people​ ​from​ ​my​ ​camp​ ​also​ ​contested​ ​for​​ Executive​ ​Council​ ​positions. Apart​ ​from​ ​that,​ ​some​ ​dengue​ ​cases​ ​were​ ​reported,​ ​so​ ​I ​ ​have​ ​spoken​ ​to​ ​the​ ​college​ ​administration regarding​ ​fumigation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​campus.​ ​We​ ​sent​ ​a​ ​notice​ ​ to​ ​the​ ​Municipal​ ​Corporation​ ​of​ ​Delhi​ ​for​ ​the same.​ ​Hopefully​ ​they’ll​ ​be​ ​coming​ ​in​ ​next​ ​week.​ ​In​ ​ another​ ​week​ ​we​ ​should​ ​be​ ​able​ ​to​ ​start​ ​the​ ​Mess and​ ​Cafe​ ​menu.​ ​We​ ​have​ ​had​ ​discussions​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Dean​ ​as​ ​well,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Estate​ ​Office​ ​regarding​ ​the concern​ ​of​ ​cleanliness​ ​in​ ​washrooms.​ ​We​ ​have​ ​also​ ​planned​ ​a​ ​Common​ ​Freshers.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. Shoma Chaudhury, a noted journalist delivered a lucid lecture on one of the most complex problems grappling the 21st century on August 23, organized by the Planning Forum. Chaudhury spoke of modern times, wherein facts aren’t the ultimate truth, and truth isn’t objective but swayed by emotion and personal belief. As a journalist, Chaudhury has been exposed to a world full of reported truths and lies: The political purposes to bury the former and the veritable verisimilitude of the latter. Her professional hands-on experiences provide a telescoped view of the post-modern world riddled with ironies and paradoxes. As an individual, which narrative must one believe in? Chaudhury dwelt on the importance of a mature public discourse and its two facets. One, the matter of discourse, and second, the public who involves itself in it. The matter of discourse attains some significance with regard to a Post-Truth world, for this discourse is usually biased. “It’s a hard world out there for journalists”, she says. Journalism is not valued enough; people need to pay for their news. Highly underpaid by the public, it becomes difficult for news houses to sustain themselves, and they fall back on sponsors who influence the reported matter to suit their benefit. Thus, the matter of discourse which depends on the news, is often biased at the source. Since journalists do end up shaping public opinion, they should not refrain from doing so. Journalism should be subjective, but fair, accommodating all sides, and finally operating to the needs of society. Thus, even by the manner of arranging facts in an article, journalists can bring out their views clearly and then arrive at their own truth. Talking of the public, she mentioned that a demarcated public space is central to the idea of modernity. These public spaces are important non-state actors, with an influence over the power structures. But how does one become part of this larger discourse? It is “by keeping an open-mind, by finding fault in your own rhetoric”, Chaudhury suggests. She believes, we are so often swayed by our personal ideologies that we completely disregard the opposition’s views; and this is dangerous, for we may eschew certain (un)agreeable points. This is how right-wing extremist political organisations develop, she says- over time, their ideologies become increasingly rigid and lead to fascist establishments. The problem with the political discourse, she said, is the lack of a centre- there is no balance, one side ends up overpowering the other. In this Post-Truth, Post-Scientific world, facts don’t matter anymore. Emotions can transcend into bigger and perhaps, violent outcomes. The case of Babri Masjid demolition, and the Taslima Nasreen protests best explain portrayal of distorted facts and the existence of an immature political discourse which is both problematic and hazardous to the society. Speaking of portrayal of facts, Choudhary mentioned that even research in a Post-Truth world is profit-centered to the extent that hypotheses become theories without reliable facts to validate them. In this scenario thus, it becomes hard to choose your beliefs. One’s outlook hence becomes important. Chaudhury says, “Have the courage to be a radical in your views”, exist in a complex zone, acknowledge differences, for this is the hardest age to live in, amidst climate change, high levels of unemployment and a huge information explosion. Thus, she says that a single person’s resistance makes all the difference in this post-truth world. Chaudhury believes in the power of an individual- a single individual can stand up in the face of resistance and bring about a change. It’s time for us to step out of our prosaic chambers, our self-constructed bubbles and meet people who don’t conform to our beliefs. Addressing a young audience, Chaudhary explained this phenomenon through the most (over)used social media platform- Facebook. Like it is known, Facebook regulates the posts we see based on our preferences. This, she believes, has a negative effect because one does not end up exploring or reading about conflicting ideas, but has a more monolithic view of society. Therefore, she urges one to be proactive and to seek complexity in life- after all, a feature of the post-truth world is that it’s no longer divided solely into black or white. The talk remains significant in the discourse of contemporary times. Chaudhury highlights important matters: Resistance, radicalism, creation of a public space and quite importantly, biases. She summed up the essence of a post-truth world, saying that it is a world swayed by feelings and emotions, driven by the thirst for power leading to a lack of justice in a lot of cases. Thus, power becomes less pragmatic, and follows the frenzy rhetoric of the general mood, which one requires to identify and resist. Featured Image by: Aarzoo Jolly, 1st English

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. In his first piece for the Stephanian Forum, Nitish Vasav delivers an acerbic message about people in college. I made my way out of choking rooms full of people—full of people full of themselves, who as usual, had their timidity to cover it up; quite like the average Economics classroom in St. Stephen’s. However, this was a party fortunately and it was just the smoke. Cynicism aside for a bit, it was a good party with good folks. I left the party feeling weird. The replacements were lovely, but they are replacements after all. In the slowest way, a blow can possibly crush you; people you begin looking up to are extricated from familiar spaces—the café, the lawns and corridors, to be replaced by people you look down upon (only to love more dearly later). While I am mostly ranting in this article that might disguise itself under the garb of critical commentary, I am also writing this in the hope that the new students don’t fall face first, down the vortex that college can be. Let’s take a step back before we return to this. The outgoing batch was delightfully old school—reminiscent of old plays and Urdu poetry, with strange solidarity that would manifest in groups like the Mess Bench. And now, post the transition of two batches, behold the kids who are as millennial as they come in 2017. ‘Lit af’ is the new ‘Brilliant’ and well, this diverse and enthusiastic bunch of people seems rather lit af. Eclectic and promising but I don’t think that’s quite how it works here. Over the course of a few months, all the eagerness and enthusiasm is suppressed. It starts with pathetic attempts to “get to know your juniors” through what we call ‘Intros’—the most insipid possible way to welcome the new members of college. This annual cycle of subtly oppressive “humour” is just about as funny as the occasional excuse of a joke you hear in the morning assembly. Ah there, there, there. Through generous injections of dread about assemblies and timings and rules and teachers, we begin to chip parts off the first years, but it doesn’t help to lay out the worst picture. Step 2 is a process of weird socialization where the incoming first years are slowly forced to fit the trope of a ‘College Kid’. Don’t be too excited. Don’t have it all figured out. All you’re allowed to have is sleeplessness and loads of coffee. Well, the last part is brilliant but my point still holds (without even getting to debauchery domination). Some people shall force the to-hell-with-it-all attitude down your throats, I mean that’s the tune of the times (quite literally, cue “Yahi umar hai karle galti se mistake“). Stuck in the sludge of mediocrity, these people, maybe through the best of intentions, are set to drag you in. Newtonian Laws don’t apply here for the further you are from dread, mediocrity, and general meh-ness, the more the sludge draws you in. Anything new, anything that’s out there and not hiding in the shadows is met with such harsh reactions that it would put the toxicity of the Chemistry Lab dump to shame. Now, the Elections and the Open Court. Let’s have a glance at a largely ignored side of this game—us. Nobody seems to care about which candidate is better addressing an administration that’s using its power in ways akin to governments around the world today, or whose leadership would be most effective. They do however care about personal histories and regionalism. Engaging in meaningful dialogue and identifying areas that demand immediate attention does not seem to matter. All that people are here for are gaffes in the Open Court which will give them at least something to talk about until next year. Well, the only court for most people is not the one where leaders sit but where jesters do, because that’s what they try to make of the candidates. Whenever there’s someone who takes a step forward, we pull them down with the entire pressure that our lack of balls creates—in the classroom, with first years whose excitement we slowly kill and more recently, with the three candidates whose dedication we brought down with debates on regionalism and bad-memes-that-in-no-way-contribute-to-the-political-discourse-we-need. Before this gets more political and we begin to discuss how fruitful fruit shops are, and how alarming monkey alarms can be, let’s reverse this deviation. This article was never meant to convey an explicit message in the end but oops, don’t we all preach at the slightest chance? At first, I wanted to end it on a sparkling note of how despite everything, we thrive and shine because of the indomitable spirit of Stephania. However, this is more about people acting at their worst sometimes and there is no thriving and shining at the end of generally downward paths. But hey, college isn’t an endless void, it is the endless expanse of a magnificent ocean so go on, be a sailor, a pirate or maybe just a plankton but for heaven’s sake, don’t be a mindless sponge. You are brilliant and special and amazing and *chokes on cheese* yeah, you’re fantastic the way you are so go do your thing. If you are reading this, especially if college has just started for you, and even partially understand what I mean by this suffocation, pulling down and forcing of the to-hell-with-it-all attitude, do exactly that. Featured Image credits: Julie Mehretu.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. I happened to watch a reality game show on a leading television channel during the semester break at home in Cochin. The show involved the game’s protagonist choosing an opponent of their choice at every level of the game. The episode I watched was that of a young man who was doing remarkably well, but what made me notice him was that he chose a lady in the first level of the game (that is not what grabbed my attention) saying, “Ladies first” (that statement made me sit up). He did defeat that female contestant and in the next two levels too, he chose female contestants, citing reasons from how it would be easier to beat lady opponents, to some phenomenon he called ‘lady luck’. He was not impolite, but patriarchy was evident in his language, in forms that most people tend to overlook (which is a problem in itself). Social networks and communal bonds were forged centuries ago out of an intuitive sense of belonging to individuals we could communicate with easily. It was later, in the post-Renaissance period, that the ideas of nationhood and nationalism, emerged from these linguistic identities. Most anthropologists and linguists agree that it is communication that gives rise to language, not the other way round. It is humanity’s ardent desire to communicate with the fellow members of the species, which gave rise to language, which has evolved into different types, dialects and sub-dialects today. The earliest example of linguistic nationalism is that of the ancient Greeks, who distinguished themselves as a nation or ethnic community, because they spoke a language different from the Barbarians, whose communication was still primeval in nature as compared to them. Modern nation states in Europe were established primarily on linguistic grounds. In India, Andhra Pradesh became the first state to be formed based on language in 1953. Languages are flags of allegiance in today’s world, often being imposed on communities and tribes to reinforce or establish larger identities, say that of a nation. That is another book in itself. Coming back to the reality game show episode I witnessed, it was a clear example of language reflecting a social fact, which is the deep-rooted presence of patriarchy in our society. It has been through my interactions with students from across the country in my college, which led me to understand the politics of language– the sexism that still exists in modern language, the racism in etymology and colloquial terminology, the vestiges of the caste system in our native tongues- perspectives which I would not have realized if I did not have the good fortune of exposing myself to different groups of people. We might wonder what is wrong with telling a lady to do any activity first (we are told that it is gentlemanly and chivalrous- I would probably have been remarking so even today, if not for the lucky opportunities to broaden my mind), but what we often fail to realize is that such phrases and terms are subtle messages we (un)intentionally convey. …today I think twice before cracking jokes or reviewing movies– there is a lot more to language than what we hear or read. Ukrainian poster depicting a German soldier protecting a Ukrainian woman; targeted at colonists of the Reichsgau Wartheland The terms ‘gentlemanly’ and ‘chivalrous’ entered the English language since the time of ‘knights in shining armour’ and ever since connote the apparent responsibility of a man to protect the woman he is with or to let the female companions speak first, supposedly because men are stronger or capable enough to wait patiently and consider the task the lady must perform. These are archaic, patriarchal notions reeking of the supposedly ‘masculine’ qualities of intelligence and strength and resilience, compared to the ‘feminine’ traits of frailty and dependence and beauty – none of which can be attributed to any one gender. These traits and qualities vary from individual to individual, irrespective of gender, and the continued use of such terms like the ‘fairer sex’ to denote women or the use of the word ‘mankind’ to denote the human species is deplorable and deadly. They propagate the dominance of a gender or disseminate the characterization of a gender with traits in our subconscious minds. Examples abound in almost all languages, especially in English include- a ‘master’ has positive connotations, but nobody says they work for their ‘mistress’; there is a ‘chairman’, and a female chairman (pardon the terminology, English vocabulary does not help) is referred to as a ‘chairperson’. Our proverbs and pop culture references, not to mention the language used in the media, are abound with gender discrimination once we start looking for them. Racism still permeates our language, and the Varna system hides itself cleverly in Indian languages, most of them having originated from Sanskrit. We may not be racists or casteists, but the language we use often are, and do harm by reinforcing those notions. That is why today I think twice before cracking jokes or reviewing movies– there is a lot more to language than what we hear or read. We live in a post-truth world, where political leaders march to power by cleverly manipulating the politics of language. Language is one of the most important tools of propaganda, and has been used and is still being used as method of thought control. In his masterpiece ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’, George Orwell establishes ‘Newspeak’ as the official language of Oceania, devised to meet the ideological needs of the ruling dispensation. Leading articles and mass media use Newspeak, which is predicted to overtake ‘Oldspeak’ by 2050. The biggest advantage of Newspeak was to provide a unified medium of communication worldwide, making all other methods of thought impossible. Information and ideas in other languages are being systematically erased with the imposition of Newspeak in Oceania, thereby using it as a powerful tool of propaganda. Orwell writes how the word ‘free’ in Oceania meant the usage in ‘Dogs are free of lice’ and not political freedom, which used a new term ‘Crimethink’. Today, there is a manufacture of consent (Chomsky) which political and corporate powers achieve to stifle dissent, by articulating the way we view various happenings around the world in linguistic terms, that convey the dominant thought, suppressing subaltern opinions. We live in a post-truth world, where political leaders march to power by cleverly manipulating the politics of language. When demonetisation can be represented as an economic class uprising to win elections, and a President can be elected by using language that conveys fear of the immigrants, coupled with catchy slogans to reinforce identities, we realise that language plays an important role in shaping our thoughts and actions. ‘Azaadi’ means freedom, and today communities need to gain freedom from poverty, from oppression, from discrimination. But the mainstream thought in India has converted ‘azaadi’, at the behest of forces powerful enough, into a word denoting sedition and ‘anti-nationalism’. I personally know of students who are today uncomfortable with shouting ‘azaadi’ from any legitimate oppression, because of its links to Kashmiri politics and so-called anti-nationalism. The usage of terms like terrorists and martyrs, vary as per perspective of the concerned communities, and the rise of a dominant use of a term changes the politics of that term. Violence can never be condoned, and if Hamas soldiers who attack Israel are terrorists, then why are Israeli soldiers who forcibly displace Palestinians and kill innocent civilians in their own land, not branded so? A Delhi University student, Gurmehar Kaur, rightly pointed out that her decorated Army Captain father was killed by War, not by Pakistan. This logical, rational statement saw anger and hatred spewed by trolls, and even adverse comments from politicians and celebrities. She left Delhi when she started receiving rape threats (Welcome to 21st century India). If there is one thing I learnt over the years, it has been to constantly try to question the language used and the information which is bombarded at me, every day, by people and by the media. I believe it is important to ensure that we do not fall prey to the propaganda traps of mainstream language, and we refrain from propagating social evils like patriarchy and racism, even subtly, through words oral and written. It is never possible to change the system by changing language (which in itself is never perfect, with all of us unknowingly using subtle terms of patriarchy or elitism, however hard we try), because language reflects the society. As a writer pointed out, ultimately even if we change linguistic convention to use only ‘chairperson’, it does not change the fact that more men occupy the position than women. But it surely is a start. It is time to start looking out for a lot more than to cross the t’s and dot the i’s. And as Martin Osborne, an economist, wrote in the foreword to his Game Theory textbook which we learn, I shall henceforth use ‘she’ to denote an individual in general terms as the dominant convention exceedingly favours the men, and we can do our small part to prevent language from propagating patriarchy. Acknowledgements: Gratitude is in order to the Gender Studies Cell and Planning Forum at my college, my college library, and my politically motivated fellow batchmates.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, ‘Freedom of Expression’ is the right of every individual to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. The right to express oneself freely is not only necessary for individual growth but also for the growth and development of a country. A democracy would not really be a democracy if its citizens are petrified of voicing their opinions. The freedom to criticize anachronistic and obsolete ideas shows that the society is dynamic enough to change in adverse situations. But in this tech savvy era, where sharing information across the globe takes only a few seconds, are we really making the best use of our freedom? The free word can cause harm by propagating offensive sentiments or inciting violence. With the internet and its security of anonymity, societies have become increasingly careless with the written word. From celebrities to common people, nobody gets spared from hateful unsolicited advice. A few days back, one of the leading ladies of Bollywood, Deepika Padukone was shamed on Instagram for posting photographs which apparently ‘insulted’ the hallowed ideals of ‘Indian Culture’. Likewise, when Priyanka Chopra posted a photograph of her meeting the Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Berlin, little did she know that she would be mocked at for wearing a dress and sitting with her legs crossed. Haters slammed her for her lack of etiquette. The free word can cause harm by propagating offensive sentiments or inciting violence. Last year, singer Azealia Banks was accused of throwing racist insults against former One Direction member, Zayn Malik. She tweeted a series of racial and homophobic slurs about him. Research has shown that cyber bullying can have more negative effects than traditional bullying. It leaves the victim feeling scared, depressed, angry and frustrated. It is easier for a person to bully someone over the internet because then, they do not have to face the repercussions of their hatred. They do not know how detrimental their comments can be. One of the most damaging effects is that the victim begins to avoid any social contact. Harassment of people on online platforms is an act of sheer cowardice and needs to be curbed. In the name of freedom of expression, bullies can terrorize people, xenophobic ideas are spread without restraint and out-dated social standards are enforced in the form of slut shaming, body shaming and homophobic commentary. This can surely not be what our founding fathers had in their mind when they guarded the right to freedom of expression as constitutionally guaranteed human right. Freedom of expression only works so far as one does not harm another being. It is time for us to realize that with great freedom comes great responsibility.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. With PM Modi declaring the Emergency as the darkest days of our democracy, it seems fair to revisit the situation 42 years down the line to see how our constitution failed its citizens at a certain point in history. Mrs Indira Gandhi’s move of declaration of the Emergency led to her being compared with the world’s most notorious dictators, and it seems that India is yet to learn from the aftermath. The period of highs The period of 1971-72 marked the hiatus of Indira Gandhi’s leadership. She had neutralized her enemies within the Congress and inflicted a severe defeat on Pakistan in the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War. Her popularity seemed unparalleled with policies like ‘Garibi Hatao’, which gave her a pro-poor image, and yielded the two-third mandate that she desired. What led to the Emergency? Garibi Hatao was ‘a goal without a method’ according to Dr Shashi Tharoor. The existing recession, unemployment, spiral of inflation, and the refugee proliferation in the wake of The Bangladesh War led to a sharp deficit in funds; simultaneously, the mid-70s oil crisis added to the plight. Gandhi also interfered with the independence of the Judiciary by appointing A. N. Ray as the Chief Justice of India, and superseding three senior judges, thereby breaking convention. In Gujarat and Bihar violence and strikes broke out over lack of food and unemployment and soon Gandhian and veteran politician Jayaprakash Narayan (JP) rose to prominence, calling for a ‘total revolution.’ Meanwhile, the Allahabad High Court passed a judgement against Gandhi claiming that her seat in the Lok Sabha was corruptly gained, and that she would be required to forfeit her position as PM of India. Right after, Gujarat elections saw the rise of the Janata Party led by Narayan and the state slipped from the hands of Mrs Gandhi. As Gandhi’s case moved to the Supreme Court, JP announced a weeklong mass rally to force Gandhi down. Mrs Gandhi responded with the declaration of Internal Emergency on 26th June, based on Article 352. Why is this significant today? The Emergency lasted for 21 months, from 1975 to 1977, and is a classic example of how quickly a democracy can turn despotic. The Emergency was marked by press censorship, suspension of Fundamental Rights and a series of draconian decrees which reduced the power of the Parliament and tampered with the power of Judicial Review of the Judiciary. Many news houses like The Times of India, printed blank newspapers to show that they were being censored. Journalists like Kuldeep Nair, politicians of the opposition were incarcerated for their criticism of the government’s moves. Focus was then shifted to a calling for maxims like ‘a new sense of discipline’, ‘discipline makes the nation great’ and ‘talk less, work more’. Once the Emergency was lifted, Gandhi lost and was unable to even get elected to the Lok Sabha. The darkest days of the nation will dawn upon us when religion and politics will shake hands, when party propaganda will influence every aspect of our life: From what we wear, to what we speak, eat, or do. India will complete 70 years of its independence this August as a democratic country. However, India has developed its own brand of democracy, given its unique culture and peculiar problems. Our elections are allegedly rigged, marked by spurts of violence and corruption which is considered normal. Though Mrs Gandhi’s rule is seen as the darkest time in Indian political history, but to me, the darkest days will come when a party with overwhelming support would hold a high mandate in the Lok Sabha, to pass any draconian law without a declaration of Emergency. The darkest days of the nation will dawn upon us when religion and politics will shake hands, when party propaganda will influence every aspect of our life: From what we wear, to what we speak, eat, or do. The darkest days will dawn upon us when innocents will be killed, surrounded by angry mobs and when life will be ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ I hope, the citizens will stand up in opposition by borrowing strength from the ideals of democracy to oppose the Big Brother. Light will only dawn on India then, if people realize the nature of a democracy garbing despotism.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. Recently, the words ‘Freedom of Speech’ have come under the spotlight. They have been used, misused and abused innumerable times. Saying the term out loud makes us feel powerful, in control and most of all, human. At first glance, it might seem like a very simple idea for us to wrap our heads around: Human beings, the most superior species on planet Earth should have the right to say what they want to. Yet, there are restrictions on this right, and surely we agree that there ought to be. There is also consensus that these restrictions should be reasonable. An example that is often cited to explain the nature of these limitations is that the right to Freedom of Speech will not protect a man who is “Yelling fire in a crowded theater.” Closer home, the word that might lead to prosecution (rather, it has) could also be ‘Azaadi.’ So, what happens when these limitations start to become larger than the right itself? When they start seeping into our daily lives, our views, our ideas, our opinions, our college, our nation? Who turns that fuzzy and blurred line between reasonable and unreasonable limitations into a clearly defined one? I might not have the answer to any of these questions but what I do know is that I have the liberty to ask them (at least at the time that I am writing this, I do.) I believe our beloved Freedom of Speech is in troubled waters right now, and the only way to bring it back safely ashore is to understand the magnitude of damage we cause to the very foundation of our country when we curb an individual’s right to it. After all, there is a reason that Freedom of Speech is one of the main pillars of democracy and is frequently referred to as the mother of all liberties. In these interlinked spheres of free speech and democracy, there is a term called ‘The heckler’s veto’ that is defined as the suppression of free speech by those in power, using excuses of possibilities of public dissent and threat to public safety. Yet, even a casual perusal of any Indian History book will tell us that most of India’s triumphs have been based solely on peaceful protests and public discourse. Therefore, when the largest democracy in the world starts to use the once widely celebrated means of expressing discontent as the reason to curb rights of its citizens, we have to come to terms with the fact that if we don’t question these curtailments now, we might not have the choice to question them in the future. So, next time when someone gets castigated for yelling ‘Fire’, maybe we should look around and check, because there might really be one.

Disclaimer: The Stephanian Forum does not take any institutional position on its content and would like to inform readers that the views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the author. In an unprecedented turn of events, an anguished BJP spokesperson confirmed on Monday that Parliament had been adjourned for a week due to a hostile pillow fight between members of the Congress and those from her own party. “They started it”, she meekly opines. “And soon enough, there was a mass of feathers flying all over the place. I had to rush immediately because of my allergy.” I’m kidding—but I won’t be surprised if this ‘news’ started doing the rounds on all major social media in the next 24 hours, with concerned citizens lamenting the loss of decorum in the country’s highest legislature. Proliferation of fake news has definitely been one of the worse byproducts of the age of information overload; the sheer number of stories inundating the internet makes it impossible for an individual reader to verify the veracity of each. Give yourself a pat on the back if you could guess that there was no pillow fight—but remember that many can’t tell the difference (Remember that one uncle who uses a phoney WhatsApp forward as the basis of all his political arguments?) Throughout the 2016 presidential campaign in the USA, entirely fabricated articles gained the confidence of the electorate, at times outperforming legitimate news in terms of likes, comments and shares on Facebook, perhaps because of their unrelenting sensationalism. There was a piece on Pope Francis endorsing Donald Trump, one on a child sex-slave ring run by Hillary Clinton and people believed these wholeheartedly—both because of their inability to tell that these are untrue and because these stories confirmed their inherent biases about certain candidates. There is much to fear in a post-truth world in which personal opinion and emotion gain primacy over objective facts as yardsticks for measuring the quality of information. Merely raising awareness about the existence of canards doesn’t help—it often, ironically, worsens the problem because people start labelling as ‘fake’ anything they wish to dismiss, including perfectly accurate reporting. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg launched a multi-pronged approach to curb misinformation last week. He’s making it easier for users to report hoaxes, collaborating with third party fact-checking organisations and disrupting incentives for financially motivated spamming. But much too often institutional measures such as these fail to contain bogus news, which spreads because people want it to. The onus for confirming the validity of news, then naturally falls on the end user. There are several things you can do to become a more informed consumer of news. Develop the habit of checking whether the assertions made in an article are backed by relevant studies, statistics or fact-based evidence. Does the author cite multiple credible sources? Does the peice allow subjects to respond to criticism? Secondly, become more aware of your own prejudices, which in important ways shape the way you evaluate news. Do you ever turn to an openly partisan news outlet, because nobody else covers some issue dear to you in as much detail? Do you read reports that go against a cause you care about more critically than usual? The system which spreads rumours is only as flawed as the people comprising it, and that may include you.

I live to see times when a comedy show that means no harm to any individual, religion, god or the society as a whole, is crucified. To quote Groucho Marx-““If you find it hard to laugh at yourself, I would be happy to do it for you.” The most interesting agenda with the protest by a particular religious sect lashing out at the organizers and the participants is that they feel offended and believe that not just theirs but any religion is a grey area for humor. An English dictionary describes religion as, “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith”, on a more practical aspect, religion or faith as we refer to it is something that aspires hope, a flame of light at the darkest hour of the night, something that keeps you going and gives you the strength to make it to the gates of hell and back. Therefore, being a sincere atheist, I have no beliefs in god, that is not me saying that religion or god is an over rated concept, but that’s me saying that as an atheist, I’m simply the loyal opposition. Your religion may be based on the principles or teachings of ideal creators known as gods, whereas my religion is humor. When at a crossroads in my life, I can with all honesty state that humor is what kept me going, that particular group, their podcasts, their videos, that’s what kept me sane. Therefore, if you are offended by what they say or do, and you want any sort of action taken against them, that is simply you undermining my religion and stating that your religion is superior to mine. I agree that my words are clear witnesses to the fact that I am obsessed with their work, and because of that very same obsession I understand exactly how that particular religious sect feels. I have the very same feeling of hurt and offence taking over me as I see people who do not respect my ideals and my beliefs without being aware of the intentions. And now, to the most important aspect of this protest, how political and religious groups have fired abruptly on this show for publicizing concepts of obscenity and vulgarity and for using abusive or offensive content to make hay while the sun shines. We live in a developing country which is bleeding constantly due to casteism, sexism, poverty, corruption, and crimes against women, unemployment, malnutrition, and illiteracy. Our country is not just a country with different religions or castes or creeds, but a blend of different mentalities, there are people who believe that they have the right to feel offended and there are people who when offended, do something about it through channelizing the offence in a positive manner, by talking about it, by writing about it, by singing about it or by joking about it. I am not cynical about my country or my society but I feel a very important urge to speak out about things that have been left untouched by this controversy, to get offended whether in terms of sexism or casteism in a country like in India is ironical to begin with. Our society is dominated by two professional industries, the media/glamour industry and the political industry, first of all, talking about the media or the glamour industry that includes advertisements, television shows, movies and music, how come are we not offended when an advertisement is aired on national TV with a male using a deodorant and several different females clinging to him like bees on a hive, when patriarchal dominance is showcased in almost 70% of the television shows, when historical shows include scenes of royals visiting brothels, when reality shows use individuals from unfortunate backgrounds and exploit their life stories to score TRP brownies. Why they are not offended when physical intimacy and out-right violence is celebrated on the silver screen, or when almost nude individuals (both male & female) dance around each other indicating sexual provocation. Where are their baskets that catch offence when a rapper is given the throne and the scepter of the music industry by the means of sexist and senseless songs, when scripted award shows have the rich and the flamboyant flashing their glamour quotients and at some extent dishing out inferiority complexes to a normal individual? Over to the latter, people inspiring authoritative influence- politicians, self proclaimed godmen, and the police department. In a study conducted, “It was noted that a staggering 24% of elected politicians were charged with criminal activities in the year 2004, this number grew to 30% in 2009, and 34% in 2014, with the number dominated by crimes against women. The role of an elected representative is to voice the views of the people and not to criticize it, personal views have to be kept personal simply for the reason that every single individual has a different thought process, and everyone’s views are subject to respect. It may be my personal opinion and not that of anyone else’, but it is a shame to live in era where not a single day goes by without endless counts of crimes against women, and crimes committed by elected officials. I can go on record and challenge anyone who attacks a comedy show in today’s social environment to ban all such shows the day we have the honor of not reading about a single crime against women in the morning newspaper. In the year 2013, Delhi Police recorded 62,130 complaints of criminal activities of all kinds, out of which 11,836 were against police personnel. A department whose sole responsibility is to stand guard for the safety and help of the public has gone down to be the biggest source of harassment to the public. A common man who becomes the victim of any such crime thinks twice before entering a police station fearing harassment, and the question here is, should we be working proactively against humor rather than addressing these issues first. Godmen and religious cults have been active in our country with millions of followers admiring and praising them, they have also been sources of heinous crimes such as rapes, molestations and money-laundering. To sum up this argument, an obscenity is any statement or act that strongly offends the prevalent morality of the time, and the bottom line is, for how long will we ignore the issues that are corroding our developing society and understand that we have indeed entered a new era of liberal thinkers and that the morality of our time has been victimized by the traditions and culture of our past. And about the show that inspired me to write this piece, humor cannot be versatile and does not appeal to the sensibilities of every member of our society. The issue is not about freedom of speech, but freedom of choice. We have heard that one man’s revolutionary is another man’s terrorist, one man’s treasure is another man’s junk, but I feel disheartened when I witness a society where one man’s humor is another man’s obscenity.

The temperature in Delhi, as I write this, is quite unusual. A molten effervescenve is in the air. Seems like humanity is burning, regardless of colour, creed or caste. In such times, is it right to be adamant about enforcing the idea that students ought to wear full length garments below the waist while they eat? The honest argument is as follows. The assumption made is: questioning of all authority isn’t inherently bad if it makes the human condition better for all parties involved. With all the respect I have for discipline and order, the point being asserted is that if at times, because of the physical factors that surround us, if it would be ideal to remove a certain law or condition, then why not? If I would have my way, I would make it allowable to wear clothes in the mess that do not offend the majority’s sensibilities. Fortunately, I am no one to assert anything. But, nonetheless, female students are allowed to eat while wearing knee length clothes. The appeal made in this embodiment of the written word seeking goodness for the human condition is to remove the need to wear such clothes fearing break down of discipline atleast in times such as this when the city is hot. Very hot. I am not demanding anything. Only requesting. Please, respected Principal, allow us to feel at ease while eating. The only reason why I’m even trying is because I feel that Principal John Varghese is a much more approachable person of authority than our previous principal. Nothing but truly, A burning human being, the editor.

One can be found whining about the alienation on the part of certain groups in St. Stephens college, and about how cliquey communities can get; how conveniently they might ostracise you, if you land up in a group of a common language speaking people, or of a particular society or of a common demographic belonging. For instance, few days into college I was informed of the presence of a mini Kerala thriving in Delhi; this fact was sealed with the overwhelming majority of Malayalis and the cult so formed around a Mallu don. So, geographical, linguistic, ideological plurality remains a characteristic merit, which of course, we all are proud of, but at times unmatched frequencies of these groups, can leave you feeling ‘left-out’. The month of August was coming to an end, but with it, approached the event, which definitely altered all stereotypes, which had painted a deceptive picture in not only in my mind, but also of others. With the advent of the Malayalam month of Chingam, which falls between August- September, St Stephen’s College was buzzing with an air of enterprise. Surcharged members of the Malayalam Literary Society organized meetings and discussions, for one of the most awaited events in college, which materialized on September 1st and 2nd, in revelry of the harvest festival, Onam. Onam, one of the most vibrant and elaborate festivals of Kerala, commemorates the homecoming of the mythical righteous king, Mahabali. This imaginary annual visit of Mahabali from the nether world to meet his subjects is celebrated by Keralites with week-long festivities symbolic of the flourishing agrarian past and copious prosperity during the King’s reign. A sliver of this festival was brought to St. Stephen’s College, cherishing the myriad facets of God’s Own Country, for the two days. On 1st September, surge of energetic voices echoed down the corridor; voices which seemed like tigers roaring, invited serried multitude of students all the way to the Café tree. Trail of First Years painted as tigers, cavorted along the drum beats, inviting bouts of laughter and amazement from the spectators. The ‘Puli Kali’ or tiger dance, a recreational folk art, lifted the festive mood, with a combined performance in the mess lawns; with the hilarious leopard chase by the hunters, human pyramid, and finally, unfurling the ‘Onam 2015’ banner in front of all bemused students. The Tug of war, known as Vadamvali was yet another entertaining event later in the day, which saw massive participation from all the students. That evening, a walk down the main corridor was no ordinary sight. Heaps of flowers in hues of yellow, orange, purple were laid. There was a different air of cheer that evening, with people crooning to the rhythm of Malayalam songs, while lending a helping hand in the preparations. The Fine Arts Society, meanwhile meticulously laid the outline for the massive floral carpet, ‘Pookkalam’ in the main portico which was soon to be adorned with flower petals. September 2nd , was the day of Thiruvonam, when the legendary Mahabali descends on earth to revisit his populace, initiated with the Principal inaugurating the Onam celebrations at the main portico along with our very own King Mahabali, Akshay Cyril of 1st Maths honours. The inaugural ceremony was all the more scintillating with the beauteous Pookkalam, laid the previous night. It earned the appreciation of the Principal, who remarked that this would be his last Onam in college. On asking Mahabali whether he learnt Hindi, Mahabali spoke to Principal in fluent Hindi, inviting laughter from all. The ladies were dressed in impeccable off-white sarees with golden borders, and the boys in dashing mundus (and variations thereof, owing to feminist conveniences) brought a whole new festive zest to the day (and also, fodder for social media updates). The much awaited cultural show-case commenced soon afterwards, starting with the Onam vanchipattu or the ‘Boat song’, traditionally sung by the row men of all. The first year boys sang the Onam Song and got the audience involved in its rejuvenating rhythm. For aeons, the call of ‘Aarpo Eirro’ is known to enthuse and energise the spirit of camaraderie amongst the people. Later, The Third year ladies performed the traditional Thiruvathira dance, renowned for its impeccable team work and graceful moves. Portraying Parvati’s longing for Shiva, the thirty two dancers kept the spectators starkly gripped till the end. Then, Onam Sadya, considered to be the perfect meal of Kerala, was served by the Malayalam Literary Society. With umpteen varieties of dishes, people conveniently forgot that they could but eat only a finite amount, however mouth-watering the dishes were. The day ended with the screening of the blockbuster Malayalam film ‘Dhrishyam’ starring national award winning actor Mohanlal which has now been adapted into other Indian languages. The English subtitles were a boon for the non Malayali students but the acting prowess of the cast conveyed the message better than words. Coming to think of this event, now that months have past, one can conjure all the beautiful memories made in those two days. The spirit of oneness was extraordinary. By promulgating the cultural vivacity of Kerala, we discerned a connection among people separated by vast distances. Simply by mingling over Onam lunch, in taking turns for eating dinner at the mess during the preparation period, in being taught the lyrics of Malayalam songs and being applauded for getting the unfamiliar words right, and in the smiles captured by the PhotoSoc, we unconsciously wove the fringes of a beautifully different culture with the spirit of ‘Being a Stephanian’. For one thing I know: St Stephens is one place where all these privileges to witness amazing festivals knock at your door; and more than anything, it is a brilliant learning experience. Broadening your horizons and opening your mind, provides one with a deeper insight into the nuances of life and how people celebrate it, in their own distinct ways.It wasn’t only about upholding the idea of good governance, as exhibited by Mahabali, and celebrating the thriving prosperity of Kerala, but also the fact that this event certainly broke the ice between people belonging to separate communities, and enshrouded the spirit of revelry over these two glorious days. After all the wonderful experience that we went through, I myself felt well bonded over with the people I worked and interacted. And with this, I congratulate the Malayalam Literary Society for having put up a very successful show-case of a beautiful culture, which enchanted one and all in its magic. Thank you, PhotoSoc, for the wonderful pictures. Ever indebted.