ശ്രീ നാരായണ ഗുരു

 ശ്രീ നാരായണ ഗുരുവിനെ ഉത്തരാധുനിക പഠനത്തിന് വിധേയമാക്കി സിദ്ധാന്തവത്കരിക്കുന്ന പലരും മറന്നുപോകുന്നതായി കാണുന്നത് അദ്ദേഹം ആത്യന്തീകമായി അദ്വൈതാചാര്യനായിരുന്നു എന്നതാണ് . എന്നുവച്ചാൽ, വേദാധിഷ്ടിത ഹിന്ദുമതത്തിലെ പ്രശ്നത്രയി ( ഉപനിഷദ്, ബ്രമ്ഹ സൂത്ര, ഭഗവദ് ഗീത )നിഷ്കർഷിക്കുന്ന ബ്രഹ്മൻ എന്ന ആശയത്തെ താത്വീകമായി അംഗീകരിക്കുയും അതിനെ സ്ഥാപനവൽക്കരിക്കാനായി ആദി ശങ്കരൻ അവതരിപ്പിച്ച ദശനാമി സമ്പ്രദായത്തിലുള്ള സന്യാസരീതി അംഗീകരിക്കുകയും, ഹിന്ദു മതത്തിലെ സ്മാർത്ത ആചാരണത്തിലൂടെ - ശിവ, വിഷ്ണു, ദേവി, സൂര്യ, ദുർഗ, ഇഷ്ടദേവത എന്നീ ദൈവങ്ങളുടെ (സഗുണ ബ്രഹ്മൻ ) ആരാധനയിലൂടെ അദ്വൈതത്തിൽ (നിർഗുണ പരബ്രഹ്മൻ) എത്തിച്ചേരും എന്ന ആരാധന വിശ്വാസക്രമം അനുസരിക്കുകയും പ്രചരിപ്പിക്കുകയും ചെയ്തൊരു വ്യക്തിയായിരുന്നു ഗുരു. അദ്ദേഹം ദാസനാമി സമ്പ്രദായം നിഷ്കർഷിക്കുന്ന സ്മാർത്ത ആചരണത്തിന്റെ ഭാഗമായി പ്രേത-ഭൂത- മൃഗബലിയെ ശിവൻ, വിഷ്ണു, ദേവി, സൂര്യൻ, സുബ്രഹ്മണ്യൻ (ഇഷ്ടദേവത) കൊണ്ട് മാറ്റിപ്രതിഷ്ഠിക്കാൻ ശ്രമിച്ചതും അതിനായി വിദ്യാഭ്യാസത്തിനു ഊന്നൽ നൽകുകയും സംഘവും സ്ഥാപനങ്ങളും ആരംഭിക്കുകയും ചെയ്തതും ഗുരു നടപ്പിലാക്കിയ രാഷ്ട്രീയ സാമൂഹ്യ പരിഷ്കാരത്തിന്റെ ഭാഗമായാണ് അവതരിക്കപ്പെടുന്നത് . ആദി ശങ്കരൻ അദ്വൈതം സ്ഥാപനവൽക്കരിക്കാൻ സ്വീകരിച്ചോരു മാർഗമായിരുന്നു ഇത്. കൂടാതെ അദ്വൈതത്തിൽ ജാതി എന്നൊരവസ്ഥയോ മതമെന്നൊരാവസ്ഥയോ എവിടെയും സാധ്യമല്ലാത്തൊരു കാര്യവുമാണ്. ഗുരു വ്യവസായത്തിലും വാണിജ്യത്തിലും ഊന്നൽ നൽകിയത് പോലും, അദ്ദേഹമുൾപ്പെട്ട സമുദായത്തെ ആദ്ധ്യാത്മീകതയുടെ മാർഗത്തിൽ നിന്നും മനുഷ്യനെ വ്യതിചലിപ്പിക്കുന്ന കള്ളൂ ചെത്തലിൽനിന്നും മോചിപ്പിക്കാനായിരുന്നു. ഗുരു സ്മാർത്ത പദ്ധതിയിലൂന്നിയ ഇത്തരം സാമൂഹ്യപരിഷ്കാരങ്ങളെ അദ്ദേഹം ഉൾപ്പെട്ട അബ്രാഹ്മണ സമൂഹത്തിന്റെ അദ്വൈതത്തിലേക്കുള്ള ആത്മീയമാർഗമായി കണ്ടപ്പോൾ, ഡോക്ടർ പൽപ്പുവിനെപ്പോലുള്ള നേതാക്കന്മാർ അദ്ദേഹം ഉൾപ്പെട്ട ഈഴവ സമൂഹത്തിന്റെ രാഷ്ട്രീയവും ശാസ്ത്രീയവുമായ ശാക്തീകരണമായാണ് കണ്ടത്. ഈ കാഴ്ചപ്പാടിലെ അന്തരമായിരുന്നു ഡോക്ടർ പൽപ്പുവിന്റെ നേതൃത്വത്തിലുള്ള SNDP യുമായുള്ള ഗുരുവിന്റെ സ്വരച്ചേർച്ചക്കുള്ള കാരണവും. രണ്ടും അതാതിടത്തു മഹത്തായ കാര്യങ്ങൾ തന്നെയാണ്. എങ്കിലും ഇന്ന് പലരും ഡോക്ടർ പൽപ്പുവിന്റെ രാഷ്ട്രീയ വീക്ഷണകോനുള്ളൊരാളായി ഗുരുവിനെ സ്ഥാപനവൽക്കരിക്കുന്നതു ഗുരുവിനോട് ചെയ്യുന്ന ഏറ്റവും വലിയ കൊടും ക്രൂരതയായിരിക്കും. ശ്രീ നാരായണ ഗുരു അദ്വൈതിയായ ഒരതിമഹാനായ ആത്മീയാചാര്യനായിരുന്നു. അതുകൊണ്ടു തന്നെ അദ്ദേഹത്തെ അദ്ദേഹമല്ലാതായിരുന്ന ഒരു രാഷ്ട്രീയ സാമൂഹീക പരിഷ്കർത്താവാക്കാതിരിക്കുന്നതാണ് എന്തുകൊണ്ടും ഉത്തമം. അതദ്ദേഹം തിരസ്കരിച്ചോരു രീതിബോധം മാത്രമല്ല അതൊട്ടേറെ ആശയ വൈരുദ്ധ്യങ്ങളിലേക്കു നയിക്കുകയും ചെയ്യും. അത് ഗുരുവിന്റെ ആത്മീയത തിരസ്കരിക്കുന്ന ജാതിബോധമായ ചാതുർവർണ്യത്തിന്റെ വക്താക്കളായ ബ്രാഹ്മണ വ്യവസ്ഥ നടപ്പിലാക്കിയെടുക്കുന്ന വിനിയോഗത്തിന്റെ (appropriation) രീതിശാസ്ത്രം കൂടിയാണ്.

Corona pandemic, the last straw of hope for capitalism, looks like propaganda worked. - part 1

Finally, in common with many other nations, the government has imposed a 21-day quarantine period to mitigate the spread of the Coronavirus. It is important to consider the political imperatives at play behind this decision, given the prevailing atmosphere of fear around the world. Governments find it necessary to respond to the anxiety gripping their populations, fueled by widespread propaganda suggesting that the coronavirus might herald an apocalyptic end to human existence.

At this point, there seems to be little more to add to the discourse on the coronavirus. Virtually every individual worldwide has been inundated with information through mass media and social networks, effectively turning them into self-proclaimed experts on the matter. They possess a wealth of knowledge about this pathogen, except for one crucial fact: it is essentially a mild to moderate influenza virus.

According to the World Health Organization's (WHO) published information on influenza, it is characterized by a sudden onset of symptoms such as fever, dry cough, headache, muscle and joint pain, severe fatigue, sore throat, and a runny nose. The cough can be particularly severe, lasting two weeks or more. Most people recover from these symptoms within a week without requiring medical attention. However, influenza can lead to severe illness or even death, especially among high-risk groups.

Globally, these annual influenza epidemics are estimated to result in approximately 3 to 5 million cases of severe illness and about 290,000 to 650,000 respiratory-related deaths. This is a well-established fact.

To put the current situation in perspective, the coronavirus has caused the deaths of less than 16,000 individuals who fall into the high-risk category. The rest of the cases have been managed without corona-related fatalities.

In essence, the contribution of the coronavirus to the overall spectrum of influenza deaths remains below 10%, taking the lower estimate of 290,000 influenza deaths into account, or approximately 3.07% if we consider the upper estimate of 650,000 annual deaths. It is worth noting that, amid the heightened paranoia surrounding this moderate pathogen, propagandists have acknowledged that approximately 80% of those infected recover without medical intervention, with only 20% requiring medical attention—primarily for chest and throat infections. Of this 20%, less than 6 to 8% experience critical conditions necessitating hospitalization. This critical information is often presented subtly, akin to fine print on a stock/share application form—small and discernible only to those who make a concerted effort to uncover it.

So, what, then, is the underlying motive for generating hyper-paranoia around this relatively mild virus, which has coexisted with us for an extended period without provoking such widespread hysteria as seen this year?

The answer lies elsewhere. This coronavirus hyperbole serves as capitalism's last-ditch effort to resuscitate itself in the face of diminishing profit margins in the production economy. It appears that, in the post-war economic lull, they have found a successful alternative model to artificially create the much-needed economic deficit, thereby ensuring capitalism's survival. And that model is none other than the virus.

The story continues...

Corona pandemic, the last straw of hope for capitalism, looks like propaganda worked - part -ii

A caveat:

In writing this note, I want to emphasize that I am not advocating for carelessness regarding this influenza or discouraging preventive measures to contain it. As advised by medical professionals, if I do not take sufficient precautions, I understand that I could also become a patient of this influenza. Importantly, I am not an expert, and my understanding of viruses and virology is limited. With my limited training, I can read data and understand statistics. My entire note is based on the data released by WHO and other agencies in the field.

Allow me to add another caveat: Unlike the left-wing political stance, I do not view capitalism as the enemy of humanity or an exclusionary system where one percent of people build a monopoly over the remaining ninety-nine percent. In our society, functional models, including capitalism as an economic model, have emerged through continuous negotiations involving left, right, and central policies. In principle, capitalism today exists as a settlement of these various arguments. Consider organized labor unions in capitalist countries; most of them have robust labor policies and structures, even more so than many communist countries.

It's essential to remember that, unlike the communist model where the state and party have complete control over the nation, and people cannot interact with other economic models like capitalism or socialism, capitalism allows for people-to-people interaction and access to different socio-political and economic systems. Of course, there may be serious reservations about communist models.

In other words, while communism remained a geo-centric ideological nationality (as seen in USSR, China, Poland, etc.), capitalism, on the contrary, remained an adventurist expansionism aiming for universalization and globalization. Although a communist bloc existed during the pre-globalization era, it primarily consisted of non-US nations rather than forming an ideologically communist group of countries. India serves as a classic example of a nation that resisted becoming communist.

However, it's important to acknowledge that capitalism, in its practice and methods, is not without significant socio-political problems or agendas that contradict progressive human society's ideals. Its track record concerning equality, fraternity, and justice is often abysmal.

Furthermore, we must not forget that capitalism is essentially a "practiced thought model" that aims to operate independently of the state. Capitalism has consistently advocated for a market economy where the state plays a limited role. Unlike communist or socialist governments, capitalism, as an ideology, has historically not held executive positions or power. In fact, throughout its history, capitalism has often fought to break, remove, or relax the laws of the land, or, in many instances, undermine the powers of the state.

From its inception, capitalism has been motivated by individual greed and the pursuit of self-interest. This emphasis on the individual's role as primary in a market has shaped its social model into a collective of mutually suspicious individuals who perceive a threat in the existence of others. Capitalism has always been a structurally fragile system.

Although the system is often labeled with the term "competitiveness" to describe this mutual suspicion and threat perception, it has typically resulted in capitalists striving to reduce their fears and protect their self-interests, often at the expense of others. To mitigate these fears and advance their interests, capitalism has consistently relied on innovation, shipping, transportation, exploration, colonization, and even wars. Capitalism cannot escape its predatory instincts in its methods. Ideologically, I do not align with most of its frameworks and methods.

The cracks in the system:

The initial signs of fractures within capitalist systems became evident following the collapse of the USSR and the subsequent era of globalization. In this new world order, the United States, having long served as the primary counterforce to the USSR bloc, leveraged its strength to assert dominance over other Western nations for commercial gain. Many countries, particularly the traditional capitalist nations in Europe, grew uneasy with this newfound U.S. aggression. Some of the trade agreements imposed upon them appeared to be discriminatory, destabilizing their global trade shares. Consequently, the European Union (EU) was formed, uniting nations with greater bargaining power. One of the EU's early actions was the introduction of its own industrial standards, such as ISO, designed to define Euro-centric trade terms independently from the United States.

Armed with these legislations, the former imperial and colonial capitalist nations of Europe gradually constructed a bureaucratic defense mechanism against American global trade adventurism. Consequently, the United States lost its foothold in Europe, leading to the fragmentation of former Czechoslovakia, a move aimed at establishing U.S. influence in Europe while asserting NATO's role.

These fractures among capitalist nations also reflected differing conceptions of capitalism. On one side, the United States led non-state corporations advocating their brand of predatory capitalism, while on the other, Europe championed a legislatively-based, state-backed capitalism.

With these disparities in place, as corporations engaged in trade negotiations under the framework of global state agreements, capitalism began to be subjected to executive legislations rather than fostering commercial entrepreneurship or market innovation. Furthermore, as trade negotiations became enshrined in state legislations or part of legislative agreements, capitalism's ideals became intertwined with each state's political interests. Each nation formulated its own code of conduct and practices tailored to its political priorities, maintaining one set of rules for domestic operations and another for international dealings. Consequently, capitalism transitioned from an idealized predatory system, where interests could be freely advanced through innovations, shipping, colonization, and wars, to a realm governed by global legislative laws, restrictions, and administration.

In the post-USSR era, these developments triggered the proliferation of state-led trade bloc formations guided by political leaders. Moving away from the generic nature of agreements like the GATT, where each state participated individually, we now witness blocs of nations such as the G-8, G-20, Brexit, Asian bloc, and others, all vying to protect their interests while resisting external pressures.

These blocs of nations, with some countries belonging to multiple blocs, evolved into more than mere trade partners. Many nations came together to protest or resist the discriminatory clauses imposed by developed or powerful nations in their agreements. What ensued was a complete transformation of the global trade landscape and a redefinition of capitalism, accompanied by both positive and negative consequences.

Allow me to outline some of the significant repercussions resulting from these developments:

Stringent labor laws in capitalist nations, as mandated by legislative structures, compelled businesses to initiate the outsourcing of their production primarily to former or current communist countries to benefit from cheaper labor and reduced production costs. While these enhanced profit margins helped sustain businesses in capitalist countries, unfortunately, labor laws and skillsets in these outsourcing destinations became increasingly irrelevant. Consequently, unemployment became a critical issue within the labor class, rendering hard-fought labor laws, which had been the subject of court battles and political struggles spanning centuries, suddenly untenable.

Conversely, former USSR bloc nations and China, in the name of job creation and employment opportunities, unethically subsidized their citizens to favor the business interests of capitalist nations, often at the expense of their own labor forces. This led to the emergence of a new business model that involved subsidizing labor laws and citizenship rights. Although this neo-capitalist model encountered significant challenges initially, it eventually led to the upgrading of labor and production facilities. Moreover, large-scale movements of human capital and migration took place between these countries, resulting in substantial investments in logistics, transportation, and forward trading. However, these developments also gave rise to issues related to solid waste management, pollution, and environmental concerns. Consequently, not only did finished products traverse continents, but natural resources were also extracted and transported across the globe on a massive scale.

The most intricate aspect of this scenario was the accumulation of resources by countries like China, often at the expense of resource depletion in smaller developing nations like India. This situation conferred an unfair advantage in terms of production feasibility upon some countries while leaving smaller developing nations at a disadvantage.

Furthermore, despite having limited production facilities, most developed capitalist nations evolved into societies primarily driven by consumption, generating the world's largest waste volumes by consuming products from developing nations. Initially, developing countries, including China and India, agreed to accept back some of this waste. However, most of these producing nations have since ceased collecting waste from developed consumerist nations.

In essence, contemporary developed capitalist nations no longer realize substantial profits from their trade compared to the early days of outsourcing. Additionally, investments directed toward upgrading production facilities and product development have enabled countries like China to make significant strides in production capabilities and innovation, to the extent that they now dictate the markets of the United States and Europe. This shift has allowed them to manipulate and influence consumer desires and demands, fundamentally reshaping capitalism.

This transformation gave rise to unexpected consequences, such as mass migrations of products, technology, resources, and people across the world. For the first time, Western capitalism encountered the power of migrants and its implications within its own borders. The traditional concept of materiality in Western capitalism now faces challenges and dictates from former communists, communists, and, at the very least, socialists. Various forms of migration, including product migrations, concept migrations, skilled labor migrations, ideological migrations, language migrations, cultural migrations, food migrations, religious migrations, and more, originating from these countries, now dominate the Western capitalist landscape.

Considering that many European capitalist nations today lean more toward legislative capitalism rather than market capitalism, their politicians began to feel threatened by identity politics. A similar situation unfolded in the United States. Consequently, capitalism shifted from expansionism to protectionism, and from its predatory colonial nature to predatory nationalism. Furthermore, the individual-centric idealism of capitalist society shifted its focus toward fundamentalistic identity politics.

The rise of identity politics led to the natural emergence of right-wing fundamentalists as leaders in these countries. Despite their control over global-reaching social media and communication companies, they initiated the closure of borders, markets, and their economies to what they referred to as outsiders—those to whom they had delegated their business and trade just a few years earlier. As a result, capitalism evolved from market-driven principles to a behavior resembling oligarchies or feudal lords from bygone eras in failed states. Moreover, this transition was increasingly preferred by these nations over the traditional capitalist approach.

The story continues with the emergence of a new economy characterized by digital nationalities and its structural consequences.

The confused design thinkers and Design thinking :The problematic narratives of Design thinking in business and its implications

 

By Narendra Raghunath

In recent times, there has been a lot of talk about "design thinking" in the corporate world. However, it is not entirely clear what this term actually means. The concept of design thinking can be traced back to the early 1990s when enterprise resource planning (ERP) was introduced in Europe. This was done to streamline processes and standardize operations in order to improve business practices following the formation of the European Union. As part of this effort, ISO standardization was introduced, which emphasized industrial process streamlining as a priority consideration for doing business in Europe.

 While this standardization process helped companies with audit troubles and government regulatory compliance, it also resulted in a frustrating bureaucratic process that led to delays in decision-making. The business houses' pragmatic decision-making processes were replaced by a rigid and lengthy multi-level procedural complaisance. Customers and users found this delay in decision-making to be a difficult and frustrating affair.

Rather than addressing the issue of rigidity at the software system level, design thinkers attempted to minimize the cost impact by addressing the issue at the user and system interaction stage. They assumed that if user-customer interactions in ERP systems were made comfortable, this issue of user/customer frustration could be resolved amicably. To achieve this, they developed user interface design tools, techniques, and methods as tangible solutions to address this issue.

However, when user interface designs still could not meet the expectations of pragmatic user needs beyond its peripheral interface comfort, and the problem still remained embedded in a non-flexible process flow, designers developed the next level of the solution by defining user interaction and user experience design. But since the problem continued to remain at the lengthy operational procedures embedded in software systems, the newly developed user interaction and user experience design also could not resolve the issue of customer needs, which is an essential value point entity in any market.

Despite these setbacks, this hydra-headed software monster and its bureaucratic decision-making processes slowly and steadily found its way through all areas of corporate business governance and its operational management. It is important to recognize that many times, facts are stranger than fiction in the corporate world.

 In recent years, the business world has faced a significant challenge in reconciling its bureaucratic operational systems with the ever-evolving needs of the market. As a result, business executives and corporate leaders have found themselves feeling the stifling effects of their operational procedures. To address this issue, they turned once again to designers for solutions.

 Designers suggested an amalgamation of previously designed tools, techniques, and methods on a single platform to address issues at multiple levels - interface, interaction, and experience. This new approach, known as user-centric design, unfortunately, failed to address the core issue of non-flexibility in operational procedures.

 The prolonged adherence to strict linear operational procedures has had adverse impacts on business decision-making processes, with approaches becoming increasingly bureaucratic and devoid of lateral thinking or imagination. This conflict has created problems not only at the user/market end but also at the executive decision-making level, where fast-paced technological innovations often clash with delayed executive procedures. Nokia's collapse is a prime example of the dichotomy that exists between fast-paced technological innovations and delayed executive procedures.

 The window of time and opportunity that technological innovations and changes leave for an industry to make decisions and implement them has never been so alarmingly skewed. Business executives no longer have the luxury of time to make decisions and implement them.

 Many corporate leaders believe that a lateral design thinking process can salvage the situation by incorporating creativity into decision-making processes. Design thinking prioritizes lateral thinking, allowing for more flexible decision-making processes that can keep up with technological developments. However, this transition has been challenging, as the expertise of designers has traditionally been limited to the micro level rather than macro systems like the corporate world. While emerging exceptions like service design methods are attempting to address macro-level systems, the tools, techniques, and methods must still be derived from their present micro-level conditioning.

 As a result of these challenges, designers attempting to engage in the design thinking process at the macro level have either struggled with their granular discipline thinking models or copied existing macro-level business systems that are already at the core of the problem. User-centric design models have also failed, owing to their peripheral user-end micro-management conceptualization.

 In 2012, the industry reorganized its priorities in design education from skill/craft to design thinking. However, the complexity of this transition was not as simple as the industry had anticipated, and the inadequacy of designers and their expertise has had an adverse impact on introducing lateral design thinking. Despite these challenges, many believe that creative lateral imagination can help overcome these troubles and propel an effective seamless operational process.

In addition to the issue of procedural delays caused by the standardization of procedures that are becoming counterproductive to system efficiency, there is another important issue that businesses and society at large are facing today: the inadequacy of speed that technology is accentuating in society. Although computers and phones are able to increase the speed of operations in their systems, the human experience and interactions that are defined by socio-cultural facets of political and economic factoring of equity and justice or decision-making have not changed much. Considering these are the facets that determine the efficacy of any system, especially in governance and administration defined by interpersonal relationships and ego, most of these technological advancements in speed are turning out to be futile exercises, especially in industry.

Industry and design thinkers have responded to this issue with a user-centric design tool at the experience and interaction stage. They have brought up the business philosophy of “value addition” to their existing business models by introducing related or unrelated features to their products to sustain user interest in their products or systems. For example, the mobile phone has not changed its basic physical form of a rectangle derived from a men's shirt pocket. These days, they keep introducing some “value” additions in terms of apps or recording features to their products to divert human attention span from actual product quality or needs.

 Frustrated with their unsuccessful attempts to be the solution providers in this chaos, many design thinkers are now putting forward a suggestion to augment the existing design practices back to the age-old system-thinking model. They argue that to grapple with the situation, one has to return to the basics with a holistic design thinking process to comprehend the system or address its problem from scratch. However, what they do not unfortunately foresee is that the difference between micro and macro systems is not just about the scale difference in the part and whole where one can apply reductive or deductive methods. Instead, they are about the evolutionary form difference that exists between them. Today, in a micro and macro system, one may be able to disintegrate a part without affecting the whole or a whole without affecting a part. For instance, in business, amalgamation, takeover, sell-out, or liquidation are completely different things for companies and corporates.

 

The question now is where the solution lies or how to solve this vexing question of business and the economy, which are getting into deeper water day by day. Another important question is what the actual design thinking should be. To answer this question, we must consider that macro systems are not a lean metaphorical structure but a colossal evolutionary build-up. For the time being, we need to set aside the formal “form that follows the function” of granular design thinking or the “part that forms the whole” of reductionist thinking. Instead, we need to adopt a new design thinking approach that is capable of addressing the complex interdependencies and interactions that exist in macro systems. This approach needs to be holistic, integrative, and systems thinking and should consider the evolutionary nature of macro systems. Only then can we begin to address the challenges facing business and society at large.

 

The monarchs and Oligarchs of the world of business :

 

In a globalized business environment, with diverse legal protocols and compliances from country to country and state to state, standardized operation procedures are essential for effective administrative control and legal and tax compliance. However, the problem lies not in the rigidity of these systems but in the corporate governance structures that exist in our world today. Most big corporates operate like old European monarchs and oligarchs in their practices and decision-making chain of command. These structures interrupt their chain of command with compulsory procedural compliances involving multiple agencies from taxation, company law board, banks, stock exchanges, states, and nations.

The issue of structural rigidity is not new, but what exacerbates it is the opaque and arbitrary power structures in these organizations. Today, citizens, users, and customers are highly conscious of their democratic rights, including equity and justice, and will not tolerate businesses that operate like absolute monarchs or oligarchs. If these businesses want to be surviving and be viable, then their practices need to be restructured, and their chain of command needs to comply with democracy and its practices.

 Design thinking needs to address this structural issue rather than glossing over it with creative facelifts at the user interface or experience level. Restructuring the power structures to comply with democracy will bring about greater transparency, accountability, and ethical coherence. Corruption and nepotism will be tackled more effectively, and the enforced transparency of linear operational procedures will not become a problem. Designers who focus only on user ends or hold onto monarchic and oligarchic business structures will be erased from human history, particularly in countries like India, where the gap between the rich and poor is widening too fast and too much with its adverse consequences.

 Design thinking should start with understanding the political structure of these business houses and their operations to comprehend their real problem. Democracy should be the best lateral thinking that should inform the design thinking of these organizations. Decision-making should be decentralized, legally compliant, and ethically coherent. This approach will help tackle the structural issues that undermine the efficacy of these businesses and promote transparency and accountability.

Vincent Van Gogh, who used brush and canvas to make the Japanese wood cut images, never understood his art.

The tragic hero of the painter and 20th-century art lover was a victim of styles, techniques and methods. Three things complicated his artistic life: his love for Japanese woodcut prints, his understanding of colours as light, and the painting as an image-making medium. These three strands continued to trouble him throughout his life and failed him at every stage of his journey.

In the beginning, as evident in his "Potato Eater" painting and earlier works, his concern seemed to be the quest for post-baroque light and visual sensibility. Perhaps, due to the romanticism of Japanese artworks existing in Europe during those days, it later evolved into an obsession with Japanese woodcut print images, which intensified the intense negotiation between painting as a medium and its technique.

His explorations, ranging from baroque highlights to illusionary pointillism, and the idea of segregated colours forming the image in the viewer's eyes as in impressionism, led to complete confusion and disillusionment. This speaks volumes about the tragic fate of this artist. His use of woollen colour balls to understand the colour palette further complicated matters, as he struggled to comprehend the conventional artistic merits demanded by his profession.

We may be able to classify his works into three stages. The first stage comprises his black and white drawings to understand highlights that define forms in conventional paintings, especially Baroque and post-baroque formalism. The second stage reflects his realization that the light in the baroque style limits colour possibilities, as argued by impressionists who rejected darkness in their work. During this period, he studied colour but could neither decide nor understand the method to achieve it in painting. In his famous painting "Garden with Courting Couples," he showcases the struggle between pointillistic and impressionistic style differences and his confusion.

Perhaps he had not been able to understand or was not convinced about the impressionist painters' argument that segregated colours have the capacity to form a seamless image in the viewer's eyes. Alternatively, he may have believed that he found his solution for this vexed question of colour separations in Japanese woodcut prints, a style he continued for the rest of his life. His first colourful self-portrait as an assertive artist speaks volumes about his newfound confidence. It seemed like he thought he had finally cracked it. Unfortunately, he could not realize the difference between colour separation in print and its perception by the viewer. The third stage encompasses the era he worked with Gauguin, where he finally attempted to separate form from techniques like modernists, only to hopelessly give it all up.

He could not understand why the art world could not accept him as an artist, and he could not realize that for conventional art markets, his works were considered only as images of woodcut prints, while the rest were seen as exploratory paintings akin to the works of art school students who tried out different techniques from Renaissance to Baroque, pointillism to Japanese woodcut images, and modernism to learn the art-making process.

Between those two paintings and over three years: in 1887, during the days he spent in Paris, hoping to understand colours and other contemporary art practices, he painted "Garden with Courting Couples: Square Saint" using pointillism and woodcut image technique in his effort to move away from his dark Baroque style of light and its highlights.

This garden, with two pathways from both ends of the painting joining into one, where couples were courting in love and trees were blooming under the pale light blue sky, marks the opening up of an artist discovering a new world of art and its possibilities. After this painting, he went on to assume that he had cracked the vexing question of the impressionist's argument of colour through the woodcut image's colour separation. His portrait series offers evidence of this confusion. Later on, he realized that the Paris modern art world had moved beyond such confusion. He continued his artistic journey with Henri de Toulouse-Lautrec, attempting to be a contemporary artist capturing the movements of form and colour in the human body and its performance. Once again, he found that his relationship with colour, light, and form was slipping away. He decided to move out of Paris to a more natural-rural setting to explore art and its facets as a human desire. He hoped Gauguin would help him resolve his complications. But Gauguin, with his profound understanding of form and colour, could easily identify Vincent's problem. Even as Vincent tried to imbibe Gauguin's style and treatment, he realized his incapacity to grasp Gauguin's mastery of colour and form in composition. Slowly but steadily, his world started to fall apart, and his Starry Night emerged from an asylum where the darkness of baroque, brush patches of woodcut images, and movements of modernism clashed with each other in vibrant colours and forms, representing his eternal agony.

The 1889 painting "Starry Nights," a step before his "Wheatfield with Crows," which was painted in 1890, shows that he still had some hope. Then in 1890 came the Wheatfield with Crows. After three years, he went back to his hopeful days in Paris to the same garden - "The Garden with Courting Couples: Square of Saints." But this time, it was devoid of blossoming trees of hope, courting couples of love, a peaceful and pleasant pale blue sky, and the enthusiasm to experiment with painting techniques of pointillism, and woodcut style. The Garden looked barren, with a post-harvest dried yellow wheat field. The two pathways that joined into one were no longer hopeful of finding a common path, but they were hopelessly reaching out to nowhere. A storm was building in the sky, where his woodcut-style patches were losing out to the darkness of baroque. The garden of his engagement with the art world offered nothing to him except the dark crows of doom looming large. He became hopeless, or the conventional art world was successful in convincing him that he was hopeless in the art world. Although he painted a few more paintings later, this painting became the end of his three years of evolution and the end of his life. The art world of his time considered him an image maker of an existing image-making technique: Japanese woodcut prints. 

Vincent accepted that verdict. In 1890, before his death, he wrote, "I feel – a failure – that’s it as regards me – I feel that that’s the fate I’m accepting. And which won’t change any more."

But in my 16 years of art teaching, I've never found anything as intensive and successful as the life and works of Vincent as tools to inspire students to live their dreams and imagine their art. He never realized that an artist's failures, fault lines, and vulnerabilities that define an artist's life of intense passion are the art, and it is not the popular consumption or the niche understandings of technique and treatments that the market defines as art. Both the market and Vincent failed to understand those three years' journey between 1887's "Garden with Courting Couples" to 1890's "Wheat Field with Crows" - as the metamorphosis of an artist and his art.

Forget the world, Vincent, who used brush and canvas to make the Japanese woodcut images, never understood his art. What a tragedy!

Windows

During a lecture at CEPT University, architect Prof. Vasavada shared an amusing thought about windows. He jokingly mentioned that when clients ask about windows in their homes, he would suggest placing a painting or print of windows instead of actual ones. He questioned why one would want to waste wall space when they rarely open windows due to dust or for using air conditioning. Besides, curtains often cover them, adding to the accumulation of dust. 

Although it was a joke, it reminds us of the sombre reality of windows in our urban lives. Historically, windows served as openings that brought light and fresh air into rooms, transforming dark spaces into bright ones. They hold nostalgic memories and emotional encounters. In fairy tales, windows were the means of escape for captive princesses from fortified castles, and lovers like Romeo and Juliet expressed their love through these romantic points. Their role in love stories is so significant that some beautiful Hindi film songs, such as "mere samne wali kidikki pein...," celebrate the youthful essence of windows in human life. In Arabian Nights stories, Persian windows that opened to moonlit skies, and Sufi songs praising the philosophical role of windows in expressing the reality of life and its metaphysical world, immortalized their philosophical and cultural significance.

Windows in buildings are aesthetically pleasing both from the inside and outside. They represent human needs and aspirations, balancing embellishment and functionality. Externally, they become symbols of social status in architecture, while internally they serve as escape routes from the confines of the built environment.

The famous Hawa Mahal in Jaipur tells another story of gender negotiations through windows—the unseen women hidden amidst the hustle and bustle of cities. Windows also act as secret passages for social and gender considerations, allowing the oppressed to connect with the forbidden world outside while adhering to social customs. In Kerala, a renowned traditional architectural element covers windows, enabling a view of the outside world from within while restricting the view from the inside to the outside. The partially reflective glasses that adorn our cities today have perfected this game.

 Throughout my artistic journey, I have always found these intriguing aspects of human life to be fascinating. In Paldi, Ahmedabad, there was a Gujarati bungalow near Parimal Char Rasta that caught my attention. Its transparent glass windows were always closed, yet there was a play of light behind their transparency. The idea of a fragile, transparent window providing a sense of security to the household amidst the violent world outside amused me. In my art, I have painted windows and explored their role in human life numerous times, aiming to understand the complex connection they have with our lives.

 Gradually, I realised that the role of windows is not a simple narrative between ornamental frames on the outside and functional necessity on the inside. It reveals itself as a highly complex negotiation within civilisations.

 Today, as pollution and dust continue to encroach upon our cities, windows are closing, one by one. They remain shut for weeks and months, and people in urban chaos have forgotten about them. For many city dwellers, windows have become a major problem. They stay closed, becoming a passage to nostalgia, memories, and the last connection between houses and the city—they remain shut.

 

(Photos taken during my recent trip to Ahmedabad with students.)

win

Yaksha - Yakshi, a journey from Sujata

It was in 1988, during my trip to attend a job interview that I first saw these sculptures. As guards of RBI in Delhi, these two tall and strong sculpture of yaksha and yakshi.  It can intimidate anyone who walks past it with its stunning looks.  Although during those early days in Delhi,   the place was still strange to me,  on my way back to home,  I could not stop getting down from the bus near RBI  to have a second look of these sculptures.

Later on, I learned from Lalit Kala academe library that these sculpture of yaksha and yakshi were drawn its inspiration from "Parkham yaksha" and "Besnagar yakshi". During those pre internet eras, there was no other way a computer professional like me could have accessed that information. Years later,  in my study of Indian sculptural traditions and sculptors, I revisited the aesthetic constructions of Ram Kinker Baij's artworks and found a new narrative for these two wonderful works: Yaksha -Yakshini, the journey of Sujata and an artist's love.

                                            Besnagar yakshi                        Parkham yaksha Manibadhra
                                            3rd - 1st century BC                  3rd- 1st century BC

Besnagar Yakshi and Parkham Yaksha represents the early sculptural traditions of Indian art. One will certainly find the influences of early Greek/ Hellenistic sculptural traditions in these two sculpture from Mauryan empire times.  It is said that Carl Khandalawalla, an eminent art critic appointed by the RBI at the instance of JRD Tata, considered these two sculptures in particular as inspirations for the yaksha and yakshi for RBI gate. He thought, the Hindu mythical characters Kubera, the guardian of wealth and his female counterpart, Yakshi the deity of fertility as the most appropriate symbols to represent and guard RBI of the newly emerging nation.

If one looks at these possible Mauryan sculptures, one would not miss the similarity exist in the style, posture, structure and their dress. Its Hellenistic influence also can be identified from its resemblance to the Bharhut yavana relief sculpture dated circa 100 BCE. This sculpture of dwarapala is assumed to be of that of  Menander, an Indo- Greek king. 

Bharhut Yavana

The story of Ram Kinker Baij,  the artist with a political leaning begins here. Although in principle he got the approval of his design in accordance to the curatorial vision of Carl, but later on he decided to  drop the Besnagar yakshi and Parkham yaksha as his inspiration for the sculptures.  In his quest for a form in the context of RBI as the controller of money, that will also be informed by the vision of progress, he thought they do not represent the idea of guarding and its politics. 

In the process, he went back to his sculpture on Sujata, an important lady in  Buddhist tradition . In jataka tales, she is the one who gave milk to Buddha after his enlightenment. He did a concrete sculpture of her in Shanti Niketan's woods.  In this sculpture,  Ram Kinker gave a complete twist to her form. In his interpretation, she became a tall and beautiful lady, who almost looks as if she is turning into a bodhi tree herself with wonderful grace and elegance, something one would not see in his sculptures.  

Although in his sculpture,   the graceful Sujata walks with a pot on her head like the ladies we often encounter in  Indian villages, Ram kinker changed her physical features to that of a tall lady,  whom a viewer always have to look up to and not look at. The sculpture seems like Ram kinker was paying a rich tribute of reverence to the rural women's labour while making equal respect to  Sujata for her contribution to Buddha's life. 

One may also read it as his tribute to the Shanti Niketan's trees that give the imputes for many creative activities.  It is also important to note his placement of a Buddhist icon among  Shantiniketan's other  Hindu iconographies. 

Sujata- 1935

After dropping Besnagar Yakshi, one of the rare Mauryan period yakshi sculptures that also has a cloth-covered torso and the Parkham Yaksha with the Greek Hellenistic sensibilities from his consideration for the inspiration, in search of his inspirational forms,  he travelled down to Sanchi with Sujata. 

 Probably he has rejectect Besnagar yakshi and Parkham yaksha for two reasons.

One, they have the western iconography that he would not prefer for an iconic sculpture in free India,

Two the capitalistic undercurrent in the story of Yaksha and the reductionist patriarchal nature of male gaze in Besnagar Yakshi that considers her only as an operant of fertility and the associated sensuality. 

Yakshi from Burhut, the expressions of sensuality

Coming back to our story, the tall slender Sujata camouflaged among the tall trees of Shanti Niketan, took Ram Kinker to the Mauryan times Sanchi stupa to discover his yeksha and yakshi.  We are talking about the second thorana in Sanchi - Temptations of Mara, that tells the story of a wicked king called mara. In this jataka tale, Mara tries to seduce Buddha with his beautiful daughters along with his army  and gets deated. 

Temptations of Mara

Saanchi, 3rd to 1st bc

In this panel of Jataka tale, one will find at the extreme right corner,  the Sujata standing with her milk pot and fruit bowl. She is standing next to Buddha represented by the bodhi tree. Interestingly, in this panel, she is depicted as nude while  Mara and his seductive daughters remain body covered up to the waistline. The right side of the panel is where the army of Mara stands. The army stands there engaged in their own games, while Mara and his daughters are busy trying to seduce Buddha.

 This is where Sujata introduced Ram Kinker to his Yaksha and Yakshi. Look at the second sitting soldier from the centre and one will discover Ram kinker's  final Yaksha sculpture there. Unlike Parkham yaksha, Ram kinker's yaksha is a stout, powerful and aboriginal figure in its form. Although he is dutybound and loyal, he is there at the site only as a  guard protecting Mara and daughter's wickedness, but in the company of his fellow army men, he remain aloof and non-participant. In him, Ram kinker found his  Yaksha, the loyal and aloof guard of the RBI.  Most notable in this panel is the physical features of Mara and his daughters - the classic Aryan idealisation of beauty:   slender, curved, tall and cunning. whereas the demon army is sculpted as  "fat" aboriginals or Dravidas, a representation one often finds used in mainstream visual culture as a representation of villains.

For strange reasons, in this panel, Sujata was shown with the same features of Mara's seductive daughters! Although Ramkinker found his Yakshi in Sujata for her selfless service and compassion, the virtues that were missing in Mara's daughters,  he could not accept that his Sujata having any resemblance to cunning Mara's daughter's Aryan features to her. He adapted mara's army's aboriginal physical features to her. (Perhaps  the feature of the fourth lady sculpture from the centre.)   Sujata became the chauri bearing yakshi with features far from the Aryan Besnagar yakashi.  

The ten years evolution (delay) of these sculpture tells this romantic story of Ram Kinker Baij, one that has evolved with Sujata. An intricate story of a politically left leaning artist, who had his intensive negotiation with his art and its form.  A journey of love for  identity and its politics. He tells us the story of an average guard in this country through Yaksha; an average aboriginal Indian of discriminated economic and cultural strata, the one who protects the temptations of this country (here for instance the money minting RBI) . Also this guard, even as he fights to protect or facilitate the temptation drama, he never becomes  an element  of that seductive trick himself.  He looks stout as thug and still remain only a loyal soldier,  one  who is discriminated as ugly by the outsider-insider game of  aryan- Dravida visual culture, the  aesthetics of the society of economic affluence. 

 In his Yakshi, although he found  the depiction of   loyal agency of service in womanhood, but he brings in the grace of feminism by abolishing the construct of female form in elite visual culture and its male gaze.  He construct her as stout, aboriginal counter part of yaksha in nude.  Her existence,  one that is  on your face and as a provocative nudity of confident aboriginal female who's dominance in existence disturb the mainstream society.  The nudity of Yakshi and its presence there in front of RBI  went upto the level of a parliament discussion to decide the righteousness of her existence as a confident nude labourer, something that proved the merits of Ram Kinker's political construct of Yakshi, the marginalised female laborer's  body politics.  In his first  Sujata, if she remains an  aesthetically slender lady of elite grace for  male gaze, his second Sujata,  Yakshi  becomes a powerful, confident,  assertive on your face naked  lady of eminence,  who is not ashamed of her "Labour" status. Sujata becomes the  lady, we often encounter in the fields of rural India or among factory labourers. Ram kinker's yakshi becomes the epitome of  the aboriginal female labourer who fills the length and breadth of this country and still goes missing from mainstream visual culture.  Ram kinker, the left leaning artist immortalise her by placing at the most important sight of this country, where money is produced and maintained, one that defines  the value of labour and its associated visual constructs. Most importantly they were built with constructivist style of  art. 

Sujata and Ram Kinker epitomises the love of every artist with his or her socio-political or cultural positions in life that determines one's art and its form.  Ram Kinker Baij's Yaksha and Yakshi at RBI Delhi, defines it. 

Emperor Ashoka tries to  take Buddha's  relics from nagas. Sanchi. Here again we can see  Sujata at second position from second pillar form right

Image courtesy : RBI,ASI and wiki 

Art and the question of authorship and ownership in Internet era

A couple of years back one day I received a strange request from an unknown person from New York in USA to authenticate two works of mine. The work looked exactly of mine except it had some colour fading. It also had my name on left bottom in English as I often do. The only problem was I had no Idea of such a sale or transfer. On further enquiry, I learned that he sourced the work from a struggling Indian art student. During those days Google strangely would prominently show a popular Hollywood actress’s name, if anyone would image search my work. This smart Indian student made use of that opportunity and somehow managed to convince this poor chap that this actress is a big collector of my work. During that period I also had a website where I occasionally used to publish some of my exploration and it is being only explorations with the caption that “none of the works is for sale”. Our smart student made use of all these for his advantage to fleece this investor a cool four thousand eight hundred dollars with downloaded print. Since he began to have doubts about the signature in authentication letter that he contacted me for authentication. The entire drama gave me a hearty laughter. I informed the buyer that there is some colour problem in the print and if he sends me an undertaking to send those prints back and bear the courier expenses for a new set of works with my pencil signature, I will send him a new print of the same works. He happily agreed to that and I did not want our smart Indian student friend to get caught in a serious crime in the US, so I left it that.

This entire episode provoked me into a deep philosophical question of authenticity of authorship and ownership of an artwork. History of art is full of such stories where artist and their family died in poverty while their work, later on, made many others billionaires. If one search in goggle, one will find millions of photographs of the same artwork with million other’s copyright watermark on it. Cropped differently (composition) with colour scheme differently, digitally enhanced the qualities; most of them will make the original work into oblivion. Before one jump into an ethical or moral judgment about the entire affair, one may have to consider some serious philosophical artistic issues involved with image making in this entire affair. Allow me to explain in detail.

What is original in art : Labour/craft or concept?

This is a complicated question. In western art from the days of guild during Renaissance to today’s postmodern artists, a large section of artists would not be able to claim authorship of the craft of labour. Most of them are made to order or supervised. So one may have to safely discount that claim from the originality of art. Then comes conceptual authorship. Largely in an art, there are three ways an artist executes an artwork – translation, transformation and transgression. Considering these three areas are largely dealt by curatorial conceptualization in postmodern art, one leaves very little room for the authenticity of authorship of the artwork. Unlike in film, where director is only one of the authors in the creation of film with due credit is given to others in the process of filmmaking, in art, unfortunately, single individual as the artist often claims the whole authorship. One would not hear the name of craftsmen or other people involved in the execution of artworks. There are many conceptualizations involved in every artwork- technical, spatial, curatorial and finally aesthetical conceptualizations. In other words, it becomes a problematic argument when one considers the authenticity of authorship by a single individual.

Work of art and its image reproductions

As I mentioned earlier, on Internet one will find millions of image reproductions of same artwork with hundreds of copyrights for photography. In other words, the authenticity of authorship gets separated from artwork in its image reproduction as a photograph. Considering both are artistic mediums and artists execute both, one cannot claim the authorship of the other. In other words, one has the artistic liberty for a selective recreation of another artwork in its image reproduction!

From Greek time onwards, this viewer prerogative to reinterpret an artwork as observer in observer-observed and observation triangulation is already a settled subject.

This makes the authenticity of authorship complex phenomena in art world. If an artist makes claim of authorship on a craftsman’s labour in transforming a media( kindly note an artist is not selling art but sells its material transformation ) and a photographer claims authorship of its image reproduction and then a digital media artist claim authorship of reproduction’s reproduction, in today’s contemporary art world authenticity and authorship becomes a complex issue.

From that US-based Indian student (although I do not know who is this character) I started experimenting with transgressing into master’s works to transform them into historical and theoretical artworks for a long time. Still, I am as an old school ethics follower, do not claim ownership of these works. I only claim the viewer’s transformative inference authorship in such artworks. My experiments are still going on getting more and more insights into this complex world of authorship and ownership.

Considering no collector or buyer can claim ownership of art but can only claim the ownership of artwork, in today’s world these collectors cannot claim ownership of its image reproduction, unless and until they commission it or buy its rights. Considering artworks are reproduced in critique and reviews in textual format and it is legal, artists can not take away the viewers inference right in image format as well.