Colours Of The Season

This year winter melting into spring has brought out, not just the proverbial riot of colours in spring with parks and gardens in full bloom, but also two metaphorical colours, as well. And as if in poetic justice they are tending to be rioutous in the real way.

The frenzy of pink-ness acquired by stores and restaurants during February became overcast with a saffron tinge a tad more seriously this year.

So, we have in our hands a bunch of mooning lovers and a bunch of unloving goons. Or do we have a bunch of people looking for an occasion to have fun and a bunch of people looking for fun out of ruining someone elses occasion? Are we looking at a group of young people defying propriety by declaring their love rather prominently, or at a group of people defying propriety by declaring their dislike of change quiet vehemntly? Is what we are witnessing, a stream of cultural change brought about by wider exposure or a calculated drama fuelled by political aspirations? Are young people swayed by imagery and propoganda touted by international brands and media or are political minions enticed by career aspirations? Is this imagery a part of shrewd marketing tactics practiced by popular brands to stay afloat or are these lures offered by some who like to cash on ideologies or sentiments they believe to be the driving force of masses? Is someone, who wants dine out with their love, neccessarily foolish-indecent-uncultured-lacking in morality? Can somone, who believes in freezing codes for a five thousand year old culture, be deemed as fit to have any say in any forum at all? Is someone who is neither 'pink' nor 'saffron' untouched by these issues and hence out of the dialouge?

I really dont know if I know will have the same set of yes-es and no-es as everyone elae. I am seeing what I want to in all this, and so will others, including the groups on both sides of this conflict.

But what I would like people to see is that this conflict should not be between two groups of people promoting a culture and opposing it. This is not a cultural change debate. This is not a natural course of social change involving opposing beliefs. This is so not a tussle between patriarchial stenotarian regulations and rebellious young fervour. I would have rather not seen talk shows indulging in the hype and rhetoric of cultural change and plurality, of cliched instances abundant in a young generation that loves to go pubbing and is responsible as well.

Why is there a situation where anyone is even prepared to engage in a dialouge with the individuals/groups professing the right to contest personal choice and prerogative. I am saddened at the thought that neither the judicial nor the administrative setup effuses the maturity to cut into the debate with authority. Why are ministers and spokespersons running amok trying to calm the outcry and tone down extremist attitudes? Why is this a debate...why is this a situation of aggressive action and passive/active reaction? Why is it not a simple case of fanatics trying to infringe on others rights to gain some political mileage out of the resultant public outcry, who have have been stopped, because trying to controll or dictate individual choices as a political entity and not as an individual is like being fascist, which can not be allowed in a democratic state.

I may argue and convince my backward, stentorian and strict head of the family to let me go out pubbing, celebrate love, wear short clothes or walk on the street hand in hand with my boyfriend, but I'd so not accept to have a discussion with an organised group of hooligans, trying to curb individual freedom and assume dictatorial powers in the name of trying to restore and uphold cultural and moral values, that prevailed at a time when such controlls allowed a few many priviledges.


My culture and values are a part of my mixed bag and what I keep in it is for no one else to regulate.