Interesting Things and Emptiness

In the physical-store windows of all kinds, we see different kinds of things that the shop-keeper stocks and sells. Most often some unusual or interesting things in the window attract our attention and prompt us to enter and check out the stuff.

Once past the entrance windows, we see sections dedicated to a single category of goods.

When we enter an electronics shop like Croma or Vijay Sales, we often encounter number of television screens lined up on the wall. Most often all showing the same visuals. Thankfully. You can focus on one screen. And then another without feeling like you are missing out on something.

When we go to the homepages of the big ecommerce sites, 'blocks of visuals' like TV screens described above stare at us. So what do we stare at? Would depend on what frame we are in. Looking for very specific stuff or just generally in a mood to shop. If we are looking for very specific stuff, do we these blocks of visuals help? Even if we aren't looking for specific stuff, do these blocks help?

I often find that these blocks of visuals on homepages are least helpful to me. And there are many such sub-homepages too that are not really helpful. Only when I really enter a section-page that has listed the specific goods that I really get a sense to getting closer to the thing I am looking for. And even then, I consider myself lucky if I get the stuff I have in mind. And checking beyond a certain number of listings certainly makes it less interesting to shop.

It seems to me that these portals have arranged themselves in this way since they want to offer a lot of interesting things to us in a short span of time so that we can find what we want in a short span of time. Or so that we can spend a hell lot of time browsing the interesting things so that we can eventually buy the most interesting thing. Does it happen that way? Has it happened that way with you?

Facebook has us all, and grossly under-performs

How much can our eyes see in a given moment? How many moments do we have in any given day? How many moments do we spend on reading and going through the FB updates? On how many such moments we feel 'amazing'?

From how many friends (I've got some 850 odd friends) do you see updates on any given day that you check FB? And so, how many friends you would surely like to check updates from? Who are these friends? Given the number of friends, how adept you've become socially as a result of social media?  Apart from friends, how many groups are you a part of on FB?

I spend a considerable time on FB almost everyday. And yet, on reflection I feel no great on most such days. I itch to get updates from some people and I don't quite know if they've posted anything. Why? Simple, everyone's posting a lot of stuff and that lot of stuff is algorithmically curated and the algorithm is no good. If I have 850 in my friends list, and everyone's posting 4 updates on average, there you go. On any given day I have a total of 3400 updates to go through! It's become a super-market of updates!

Is there a way out? A way that can make browsing the FB timeline marginally better and yet significantly effective?

There must be a cap of, let's say, 5 updates for every user. Don't let the algorithm curate. Let all the updates appear in a sequence on the timeline. Let the user figure which updates are worth posting.

Someone will argue, another platform will emerge that will offer 50 updates for every user. Sure, can emerge. Will that be any good? Will that help you read and go through the updates in any better way?

Capping the quantities is what makes something worthwhile. Otherwise the space is wide open. And you aren't even an atomic organism when placed against that space.

I love my bed and he underwent angioplasty at the age of 36

But I don't love this place called my bedroom.

On dictionary.com, I find two meanings articulated for this concept called bedroom.

One says: a room furnished and used for sleeping

Another says: a room furnished with beds or used for sleeping

Just in case the meaning of room is debated and philosophized and spiritualized, here are two meanings that, to my mind, hold sway:

1. space or extent of space occupied by or available for something
2. opportunity or scope for something

Space available for something. Opportunity or scope for something. In this world called India, what kind of space is available for anything? I mean, for practical purposes. If room is 'opportunity or scope', what kind of opportunity or scope is available given our notions, ideas and imaginations of 'bedroom'?

Now have a look at this bedroom. I randomly picked it up searching on Google.

All the houses that you've been to, how many bedrooms have a similar layout? There goes room that means 'availability', 'scope', 'opportunity'.

And all construction companies, including the mightiest ones which are considered 'brands', keep feeding us with the ideas of 'BHK' (bedroom, hall, kitchen). With those thoughts we dream, we buy, we get into the cycles of EMIs, and so often get into those ever-debilitating problems called Lifestyle Diseases, in spite of the earnest attempts to visit the best of the gyms, and to work out on the best of the equipment.

Just yesterday, son of my Dad's good friend, at the age of 36, underwent angioplasty. Going by what I've seen of them, he lives in a house with a fair number of bedrooms and a little lawn as well to boast of.  

Made in School and Sucks

After birth, how much time does a child spend with parents?

If asked, parents would prefer the child to stay at school for as long as possible. Why? Coz they believe that their child learns and grows in school.

If we look at the quality of adult individuals, I would have doubts about learning and growing in school.

Actually after school, parents send their kids to tuition classes and other classes. There are tuition classes all around our store. I observe kids vigorously copying their homework received at tuition classes right before they enter these classes.

Do we then understand that typically parents are incapable of instructing and teaching their child? And therefore, they banish the child from their sights for a really long time of the day? Or do we understand that parents are unwilling to take responsibility of building their child into a great individual?

Or all my questions are ridiculous. Things are just fine.

Ahmedabad is a one-mall city

I just happened to visit the Gulmohar Mall. Saw quite a few branded shops closed. Enquired about the phenomenon with a service executive at one of the shops I entered.

He informed me that after the opening of Alpha One (another significantly bigger mall) footfalls have really really gone down. Saturdays and Sundays are when some crowds gather.

Some time back, I was talking to a Mississippi patron who has a retail shop at Iscon Mall. She said the same thing. Gets corroborated by the fact that a lot of shops have closed down there as well.

I have always found the air-conditioned malls unsuited in the Indian context. For Ahmedabad in particular, I have always wondered if there's a number of people that can help survive even 3 malls. It turns out, only 1 can survive. To me, even that's suspect. Let's see.

Indeed, if we debate the definition of 'mall', Ahmedabad has many which have tuition classes and offices and dental clinics and orthopedic hospitals. In that sense then malls can survive.

Add to this, the quintessential habit of finding a 'deal' makes online shopping quite attractive for people from Ahmedabad. So something like Flipkart et al offers a far bigger mall for Ahmedabadis to get hold of stuff (after checking them physically in the brick and mortar shops).

Long live the malls. 

Gandhiji and the tragedy of getting my clothes ironed

I thought about this some 5 days back.

In my ways of clothing myself, I thought I had reached a Gandhian simplicity. And on occasions I felt proud of it. Yes, thought of matching Gandhiji in matters of fashion can make anyone proud.

So I reached for my lush navy blue Mufti trousers, pulled them on and buttoned myself. And I let my palms caress my butts and feel the freshness of a ironed and washed pair of trousers.

Tragedy has epic proportions and minute ones too. I felt some burnt ends of the stitches that shaped my beloved trousers. For a little moment I felt the pinch of spending yet again, in spite of my simplified wardrobe, on a pair of blue trousers. Oh my Gandhiji!

Actually, Gandhiji surely had it better than I think. May be coz of the environment, or the lack of options available, or pure (intentional or inadvertent) wisdom.

So what if I wear only two colors - white and blue. So what if my trousers are always blue and my shirts always white. My iron-man has a world of options to contend with. My colors and others' colors. The fabric of my clothes and the fabrics of others' clothes. The content of poly-material in my clothes and the content of poly-material in others' clothes. The styling of my trousers and styling of other people's trousers.

And he has to iron them all in a given time to make sure he gets enough to sleep peacefully somehow. He has to show courage and strength to iron them all and feel music in life.

Let's say I want to feel at ease and peace, and also master my skill in the 100 square feet of space I occupy. I would stick to my drum-set. This man sticks to his coals and bicep-exercising mechanical iron. He masters it. He burns whatever comes in the way. He folds them nice and tight. Thinks he has mastered it all. All day long. And sleeps.

I might have to pay a visit to the mall yet again. Perhaps, before that think whether Gandhiji got his khadi ironed or not.

Pics courtesy: laudafinem.com and paulniederer.com

On Andy-Amelie and Coaching

Headline reads Andy appoints Amelie as his new coach. If you read this, you'll gather that for now it's limited to Wimbledon 2014.

The surprise as projected by the media is 'a male player appointing a female as coach'. If you read the article linked to earlier, you'll see that male players have appointed 'females' as their coaches earlier as well. Besides, female players have so often have had male coaches (if I am not mistaken, most female players do).

I haven't played a sport at any significantly high levels, but I have surely trained under 'coaches'. And while I haven't been a sports-coach, I have coached many a student so far under various guises.

To add, with the realization that help's available nowhere and nobody's helping me surely, I have been a coach to myself, and it has been a painstaking ultra-time-consuming process of coaching myself. It takes immense amount of what sounds like self-criticism. An attitude like this among youngsters is often labelled (mistakenly) as 'lack of confidence' or need for 'personality development'.

Andy's announcement of Amelie as her coach makes one review what 'coaching' is and who can be a 'coach'.

While in professional contexts, especially sports, naming and appointing coaches is explicit, coaches come in all forms. Teacher in a school (Taare Zameen Par style), elder brother at home, unusual friend at school, may be girl-friend, a boss et al. Just that the name 'coach' isn't explicit. We are all aware of the famous 'Eklavya-Dronacharya' coaching relationship. Rancho for his friends in 3 Idiots.

In my mind, I have no doubt that every single person who is sensitive to some area of performance and desires to achieve (as Aamir puts it in 3 Idiots) excellence, needs a coach-figure, if not all the time, surely at certain critical junctures in life and preparation. Having said that, those critical junctures are unidentifiable so very often. Which essentially means that this coach-figure is needed all the time.

I bowled in the nets imitating different bowlers. Sometimes I bowled well, sometimes pathetically. Was prodigious at swing but often went down the leg. Coaches would point out the errors sometimes but none pointed out that my front foot (left leg for a right hand bowler) was landing wrongly. I wonder they knew such nuances. I wonder they observed me closely. I wonder they were inclined to focus on any particular individual, since they had numerous pupils to oversee. Of course, I was always an introvert and 'egoistic' stoical moody affable kind of person. But I was at least 15 or 20 years younger than these coaches. Who would harness the raw energy. The one possessing it or the one watching it? I identified this problem with my bowling action just a couple or 3 years back!

Anyway, to close this, coaching requires an engagement that touches the deepest parts of your being. An engagement similar to a love-relationship in many respects. Great eyes, great observation, great reading of skills (not necessarily 'having' the skills) and temperament, great articulation and a lot more. Ivan Lendl helped Andy win the big title. Females might be different in some ways from males but in coaching 'gender' surely isn't a clinching point, and Amelie might just be more effective. Am watching closely.

Photo courtesy: www.telegraph.co.uk