Showstopper Sarkar article : An analysis... for the sake of understanding.
Let me start my POV right from the name of the article :
"Showstopper" - by definition means something of such high quality/enjoyable nature that audience keep applauding for a prolonged period. So the name is saying : "Showstopper Sarkar" - meaning, Govt that the people are applauding + "suited, booted" - yeah, I know Rahul Gandhi said that and was referring the govt was focusing on industries, corporates etc more than on farmers + "but not quite rooted" [now thats the baffling part] - 'not rooted' meaning not connected? She says people are continuing to applaud and then say the govt is not connected/rooted? - so says who? the people who are applauding or she or who? [if not her, is she speaking for someone else?] And this is what caught my attention and made me read the article. Thinking if the 'showstopper' here was the meaning that I said above or if it was saying the sarkar is actually stopping a show that someone is trying to put forth.
"Time of farmer suicide" - Talking about the suicide at the recent AAP rally? Modi wore the Monogram suit in January when Obama was here and has even been sold out in Feb. How can they be said to be in the same time? Is she saying the farmer suicide now has retrospectively bought the suit in foray for Modi?
And that's why Rahul won traction? For a 'suit-boot' in literal sense? I too thought he made some sense, but thinking he was referring to corporates as 'suit-boot'! But if Sagarika is right and he was playing politics over clothes then that's immature and worse than before. I will leave the next piece of Advice for Rahul Gandhi himself to take it up. Though i dont see how 'Dalit home excursion' is an injustice to the poor? I agree if that is called a political stunt, taking advantage of the situation/people etc. but Injustice? Doesnt that mean being unfair/cheating etc? And that in general to the poor of the country? Does Rahul promise something when he visits Dalit homes and let them be damned and take advantage of it somehow? I dont know if that happens and i dont know if there is another way to interpret this.
I cant understand the point of view here. Is she expecting the Prime Minister of the world's largest democracy to be dressed like a tea seller because he was one, during his childhood days? Then, Dirubhai Ambani should have been walking around in soiled & oiled old clothes with can of petrol until he died? And about the chaiwallah thingi, did he ever even feature in a chaiwallah dress in campaigns? Then what is the transition she is talking about?
Mayawati incident - I dont know of the scene, but I buy it. If it was done, I agree its unfair for treating people with castism/racism in this current day.
Next line is how contradictory! 'Old elite need to shed snobbery' and since we are warming to well-dressed PM, CM? And Modi makes a refreshing break? Hang on a minute, that s refreshing break? Who on in the last paragraph was cribbing about booted and not rooted and distanced dressing style etc? First she says he is not dressing as a chaiwala and has distanced away and then again says he is well dressed and is a refreshing break?! - Get your thoughts first lined up lady!
There is this whole hue and cry about visits, padayatras etc that I don't understand at all. Is this for real? Do people really expect the PM himself to go around and visit everyone and solve their problems? How is that humanly possible? And for this exact reason our democracy has provisioned MPs who then eventually roll up to the PM. It should be the MP and not the PM who should be making close, careful, regular visits. MP is the representative of PM in each area and should spearhead to solve the local problems and then, in turn, condense that to the PM on what funds/policies are needed. Be it Amethi or Amrtisar, Rai bareli or Raichur it is the region's MP who owns the first responsibility to visit the place and implement what the govt & constitution has already enabled and post that go ask the PM to come down. Has that been done? Has everyone been doing that? Unless that I only see it has failed MPs blaming PM for not coming down to their area. Irrespective of party if you have won the election to become an MP from an area, isnt it still his/her responsibility to take ownership and care of that place?
Smart clothes distance you when empathy is missing? - Who empathizing who? The PM empathizing people or the other way? Not visiting the house of everyone or every farmer in the country means the PM is not empathizing? [Remember she had also said such excursions only bring injustice?] Again contradictory, now I dont know if i should believe PM making trips to common man's homes is practical or if its needed to show empathy or if brings injustice.
'When real change in voter's lives' - Other than our govt, be it the PM or CM or anyone else, we too [as voters] should be making efforts to change our lives towards better shouldn't we? The govt should only create opportunities and we as citizens should utilize it, correct? That is my opinion and Modi might be doing that to some extent (creating room for opportunity) and might still have many open options and avenues and areas that needs focus. Now, if she is referring to making lives better by giving fish. Its a no no from me, i am never of that Idea. If someone says the idea of making life easy for someone is by giving food at throw away prices, and anything else they need at no or less price, then why will they work? That only gives way to creating a pure bipolar society. One part slogging and earning a lot and paying taxed and that tax money being spent on free living of the other part of people who lay lazy and use the free facilities for a living. And if that needs to be connected to PM's wardrobe........... I have nothing to say about maturity in that thought.
Modi is not known for soft touch and a shot from hip image? - I dont know what has backed her up to say this. Soft - i dont know. But for saying shoot from hip, which means high on speed and low on accuracy, wonder how she got that image. Neither me nor anyone i have known or talked to have this image of Modi. Anyway, makes no sense to me since i dont know of any instances that Modi regretted or had foot in mouth because of taking quick decisions.
And how on earth can this mean khaas aadmi orientation? Because he wore an expensive / monogrammed suit while meeting the president of US, and instead of wearing a chaiwallah dress? How lame.
This line had better not been there.. "we desis admire well-dressed leaders", atleast the we shouldnt have been there. Because, so far she has said anything but admired well dressed politicians.
'affection for half-naked fakirs' - okay.. so how is that [half naked fakirs] supposed to be related to politicians? Is that meaning politicians should be half naked? or meaning Fakirs should be wearing monogrammed suits? Or is the the "Fakirs" and not the half naked part she is bring in here?
"Sharp dressing.....Gajendra Singh....distress" - The only thing that i can relate to this line is a kannada proverb "And mele hodidhre dawade hallu udharthanthe", meaning "Relating a kick on the butt as having made a molar tooth dislodge". I dont think this is sanity.
The next sentence is her showcase part that she has a dictionary in the next tab or may even be that she knows some less known words. So i would rather not take that into account or try to understand that.
Rajiv Gandhi shoes..... - Lol, is all i can say.
Again the same point, I dont know if Modi himself has said this but is certainly well known that he was once a chaiwallah. But has that got to be perceived has he is still a chaiwallah or atleast was until he became the PM? I agree if he now, after becoming the PM, starts wearing a "Louis Vuitton" shawl [;)] or starts wearing gold in cpetition to Bappi Lahari or something like that. Then one can say there is change seen and is going overboard. But Modi here is only wearing what he wore pre elections on most days, well on all days except for one. One day, when he wore the monogrammed suit which is said to be gifted and then was auctioned and money given off for Ganga project. Is this whole article and hue & cry from Sagarika about that one day? Tata, NRM and Jaya are all living as they please and oh hold on are they dressing to please Sagarika? :) . And BTW, FYI Jayalalitha isnt in this stage because of her dressing or what color or design or brand she wore. Her display of wealth was on what she actually had but wasnt supposed to [now proved in court of law]. Is Modi in the same bucket? or is she implying that?
First line is among the most ridiculous and self contradictory and under confidence based statements I have ever read. So, Sagarika - congrats on that award.
-- Yes indeed the clothes wear you - when it is something like a "Louis Vuitton Shawl" that you are wearing. Or atleast in the eye of people who are only eye your clothes, its the clothes that wear you. BTW, now i wonder what was Sagarika wearing when writing the article! hmm... [BTW, i am wearing a 2 year old faded, near dying shorts and t-shirt. psst the T-Shirt is from Seattle, If Sagarika getsd to know, then she will write an article on how my neighbour's car mileage is affected and that because i am wearing a T-Shirt from US].
-- And next part is a free add on version of dictionary thrown at the reader's face.
Oh... Ambedkar who came from a poor, Dalit family and who projects an image of a man with best interests to backward class and the deprived ended up being dressed in a suit and regularly! How disconnected, not rooted and distanced. No? Oh okay, he wasnt. The Modi formula doesnt apply here.
-- Sushma & Smriti ... - Err... they wear saaris.... uhm.. does she want them to wear something else? err... really? ANd BTW, that is what Jayalalitha too as wearing when she paid the political price ;).
-- Modi's Range symbolises casting off poverty and backwardness? - What on earth was that?! Its morefunny than anything. Up above she said Modi dressing differently is a refreshing break, and then says politicos should dress according what they were early in childhood and then comes their wealth, and now this is castiing off paverty? So is this to mean our PM should be wearing torn clothes and living in slums until poverty is solved?
-- "riposte to worldview of Sangh" - 'riposte' meaning : "a quick, clever reply to an insult or criticism.". This is first time i came across this word. So thanks there Sagarika. Modi's dressing and clothes is a reply from Sangh Parivar for an insult? What is linked to what TF? Again this only reminds me of the same Kannada proverb... ("kick on the butt... molar tooth...").
-- If the Prime Ministership was different?? Different in what way? In a way that he doesnt talk at all? or talks less or talks more? or goes visting or all houses? Or less commanding? More commanding? Different in what way? Different??? Mz.Sagarika Ghose - The role is of a Prime Minister ship in real world and not a role in a movie.
-- Suit-Booted isnt about the garments? Then what was all the above stuff for? All what you said about M.Gandhi's loin cloth, R.Gandhi's Gucci shoe, I.Gandhi's clothes, Kejrival's pan shirt in politics, Smriti and Sushma's saree etc etc. Was all, now you say, was non sense? That you made me read?
-- stratospherically placed VVIP swagger?? - Why? Is that because Modi isnt visiting farmer's home [and there by bring them injustice] ?!
Conclusion : First see who the author is before reading an article. If its Sagarika, dont bother to read it if looking for a good & sensible article. And if in an elevated state of mind (high, drunk etc) and not in a state to say or read sensible, logical stuff, then go ahead and read. To get hit by a dictionary and learn some new words to use in conversations to show off that you arent drunk.
(ps : just so that no one asks later, I am writing this on a new blog roll, since my original blog is specific to Bangalore & its events, and this one has nothing to do with Bangalore exclusivity).
