Friday, July 27, 2007

Harry-puraaNa

I am an unabashed fan of Harry Potter. Not so much of a fan (my priorities have, er... changed now) to leave aside all other things and keep reading till I finish the book, but enough of a fan to prebook, buy and read as soon as possible. The narration is tight, the stories riveting and the characters are immensely loveable.

Today I had lunch at a relative’s. A few of us were discussing excitedly about ‘Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows’. (No, I still have not finished it. I have been terribly busy these couple of weeks and let R read it first.) An Uncle, G, heard our conversation and said “You would not read with so much interest if ‘baalanaagamma’ or ‘paataalabhairavi’ were released, you want only a western Harry Potter”. A couple of other elders joined in. The youngsters’ voice of protest was drowned in the elders' complaints about how today's kids loved "foreign" books and foreign everything. All this stemming from an innocent discussion about Harry Potter.

Let me make one thing clear first. I am all for preservation of Indian culture. Nobody who knows me can say that I do not read Indian books. I am pretty well-informed about our puranic and vedic lore. And it really irritates me when some people, writers included, rant that the HP series is not good, just hyped by the media. G was of the opinion that the sole reason for the popularity of HP was because of the publicity by the media. I think that the media-hype will work for the first volume and probably even the second. Beyond that, it is solely the writer's capability and the books' quality that makes the book popular or not popular.

I think I have complained elsewhere in my blog, that kids hardly read these days. They are so full of video games and the TV, that reading books other than their textbooks is somewhere at the end of their list of love-to-do things. This is if reading does find a place at all, in such a list. In this scenario, the one series that has taken many kids and adults back to reading is the Harry Potter series. They have made reading 'cool'. The books, even if they can be read very easily, are well-thought out. And since they are pretty voluminous, I think they tend to make other big books less intimidating, in the long run.

True, we have other, better books even in India. But let us not grudge Rowling her well-deserved popularity. She has given us a wonderful series of books; let's enjoy them!

Monday, July 23, 2007

ಶಚೀಹತ

ಇತ್ತೀಚೆಗೆ ಒಂದು ಮೀಟಿಂಗಿನಲ್ಲಿ ಕುಳಿತಿದ್ದಾಗ, ಅಲ್ಲೇ ಮೇಜಿನ ಮೇಲಿದ್ದ ಮಾರ್ಕರ್ ಅನ್ನು ಕೈಗೆ ತೆಗೆದುಕೊಂಡು ನೋಡುತ್ತಿದ್ದೆ. ಅದರ ಮೇಲೆ Shachihata ಎಂದು ಬರೆದಿತ್ತು. ಈ ಹೆಸರು ಜಪಾನೀಯ ಹೆಸರೆಂದು ಅನ್ನಿಸಿದರೂ, ನಮ್ಮ ಭಾಷೆಯಲ್ಲಿ ಇದಕ್ಕೆ ಏನು ಅರ್ಥವನ್ನು ಕೊಡಬಹುದೆಂಬ ಯೋಚನೆ ಬಂದಿತು.

"ಶಚೀಹತ" ಎಂಬ ಸಮಾಸವನ್ನು ಎರಡು ರೀತಿಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬಿಡಿಸಬಹುದು. ಒಂದು ತೃತೀಯಾ ತತ್ಪುರುಷ-ಸಮಾಸ, 'ಶಚ್ಯಾ ಹತಃ' - ಶಚಿಯಿಂದ ಹತನಾದವನು ಎಂದು. ಇನ್ನೊಂದು ಪಂಚಮೀ ತತ್ಪುರುಷಸಮಾಸ, "ಶಚ್ಯಾಃ ಹತಃ" - ಶಚಿಯ ಕಾರಣದಿಂದ ಹತನಾದವನು ಎಂದು. ಹತ ಎನ್ನುವುದಕ್ಕೆ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತದಲ್ಲಿ ನಾನಾ ಅರ್ಥಗಳಿವೆ. "ಹಾಳಾಗಿದ್ದು" ಎಂಬ ಅರ್ಥವೂ ಒಂದುಂಟು. ಮೊದಲನೆಯದಕ್ಕೆ, ಎಂದರೆ ಶಚಿಯಿಂದ ಹತನಾದವನ ಉದಾಹರಣೆ ನನಗೆ ಸಿಗಲಿಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೆ ಶಚಿಯ ಕಾರಣದಿಂದ ಹಾಳಾದವರು ದೊರೆತರು.

ವೇದಗಳ ಪ್ರಕಾರ ಇಂದ್ರ ಇಂದ್ರಿಯಗಳಿಗೆ ಸ್ವಾಮಿ. ಅವನ ಪತ್ನಿಯಾದ ಇಂದ್ರಾಣೀ ಅಥವಾ ಶಚೀ, ಇಂದ್ರಿಯವಸ್ತುಗಳಿಗೆ ಅಧಿದೇವತೆ. ಒಂದರ್ಥದಲ್ಲಿ "ಶಚೀಹತ" ಎಂದರೆ ಇಂದ್ರಿಯವಸ್ತುಗಳಿಂದ ಹಾಳಾದವರು ಎಂದು ಹೇಳಬಹುದಾದರೂ ಈ ಅರ್ಥ ನನಗೆ ಅಷ್ಟು ರುಚಿಸಲಿಲ್ಲ.

ಪುರಾಣಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಬರುವ ಒಂದು ಕಥೆ ಹೀಗಿದೆ. ವೃತ್ರಾಸುರನನ್ನು ಸಂಹರಿಸಿದ ಇಂದ್ರ ಆ ಪಾಪವನ್ನು ನಿವಾರಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು, ಹತ್ಯೆಯಿಂದ ತಪ್ಪಿಸಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಅಡಗಿಕೊಳ್ಳುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಲೋಕವು ಅನಿಂದ್ರವಾಗುವುದನ್ನು ತಪ್ಪಿಸಲು ದೇವತೆಗಳು ಧರ್ಮಿಷ್ಠನಾದ ಮಹಾರಾಜ ನಹುಷನನ್ನು ಕರೆತಂದು ಇಂದ್ರನನ್ನಾಗಿ ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾರೆ. ಅಧಿಕಾರಮದದಿಂದ ನಹುಷ ಶಚಿಯನ್ನು ಬಯಸುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಪಲ್ಲಕ್ಕಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಹೋಗುತ್ತಿರುವಾಗ ಬೇಗ ಹೋಗೆಂದು ಒಬ್ಬ ಋಷಿಯನ್ನು ಒದ್ದಾಗ ಕ್ರುದ್ಧನಾದ ಆ ಋಷಿ "ಅಜಗರನಾಗು" ಎಂದು ನಹುಷನನ್ನು ಶಪಿಸುತ್ತಾನೆ. ನಹುಷ ಅಜಗರನಾಗಿ ಭೂಮಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಬೀಳುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಮುಂದೆ ಊಟಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಭೀಮನನ್ನು ಹಿಡಿದು, ಯುಧಿಷ್ಠಿರ ಅವನನ್ನು ಬಿಡಿಸಿದಾಗ ಅವನಿಗೆ ಶಾಪವಿಮೋಚನೆಯಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. 'ಶಚೀಹತ' ಎಂಬುದು ನಹುಷನಿಗೆ ಅನ್ವರ್ಥನಾಮವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ.

ಇದೇ ಕಥೆಯನ್ನು ಹಿರಿಯ ಲೇಖಕರಾದ ಶ್ರೀ ದೇವುಡು ನರಸಿಂಹ ಶಾಸ್ತ್ರಿಗಳು 'ಮಹಾಕ್ಷತ್ರಿಯ' ಎಂಬ ಸುಂದರ ಕೃತಿಯಲ್ಲಿ ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಭಿನ್ನವಾಗಿ ಮೂಡಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ನಹುಷನೇ ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಮಹಾಕ್ಷತ್ರಿಯ. ವೇದಕಾಲದ ಇಂದ್ರನಿಗೆ ಸಲ್ಲಬೇಕಾದಷ್ಟು ಮರ್ಯಾದೆಯನ್ನು ಸಲ್ಲಿಸುತ್ತಲೇ, ಮಾನವನಾದ ನಹುಷನನ್ನೂ ಇಂದ್ರನಿಗೆ ಸಮಾನವಾಗಿ ಚಿತ್ರಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಸನ್ನಿವೇಶಗಳೇನೋ ಮೇಲೆ ಹೇಳಿದಂತೆಯೇ, ಆದರೆ ಪಾತ್ರಗಳ ಉದ್ದೇಶಗಳು ಮಾತ್ರ ಬೇರೆಯವು. ಇಲ್ಲಿ ನಹುಷ ಏಕಪತ್ನೀವ್ರತಸ್ಥ. ಇಂದ್ರ ಮರಳಿ ಬಂದಾಗ ನಹುಷನಂಥವನು ಇನ್ನು ನಮಗೆ ರಾಜನಾಗಿರುವುದಿಲ್ಲವಲ್ಲ ಎಂದು ದೇವತೆಗಳೂ ಮರುಗುವಷ್ಟು ದೊಡ್ಡ ವ್ಯಕ್ತಿ ಅವನು. ಹಳೆಯ ಇಂದ್ರನಿಗೆ ಅಧಿಕಾರವನ್ನು ಮರಳಿಸುವ ಮುಂಚೆ ಅವನು ಮಾಡದ ಒಂದು ಕೆಲಸವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಬೇಕೆಂದು ಸಂಕಲ್ಪಿಸಿ ನಹುಷ 'ಸಪ್ತರ್ಷಿಶಿಬಿಕಾರೋಹಣ'ವನ್ನು ಮಾಡುತ್ತಾನೆ. ಸಪ್ತರ್ಷಿಗಳು ಹೊತ್ತ ಶಿಬಿಕೆಯನ್ನು ಏರುವುದು 'ಸಪ್ತರ್ಷಿಶಿಬಿಕಾರೋಹಣ'. ಮಹಿಮಾನ್ವಿತವಾದ ಪಲ್ಲಕ್ಕಿಯಾದ್ದರಿಂದ ಅದರಲ್ಲಿ ಕುಳಿತವರು ಸಮಾಧಿಸ್ಥರಾಗಿಯೇ ಇರಬೇಕು. ಸಮಾಧಿಯಿಂದ ಕದಲಿದರೆ ಭ್ರಷ್ಟನಾಗುವುದು ನಿಶ್ಚಿತ. ಮುಂದೆ ಹೀಗಾಗುವುದೆಂದು ತಿಳಿದಿದ್ದರೂ ನಹುಷನೇ ಶಿಬಿಕಾರೋಹಣವನ್ನು ಮಾಡಿ, ಶಾಪವನ್ನೂ ಸಮಚಿತ್ತನಾಗಿ ಧರಿಸುತ್ತಾನೆ.

ನನಗೆ ಭಾಸ ತನ್ನ 'ಪಂಚರಾತ್ರ'ದಲ್ಲಿ ಮತ್ತು ರನ್ನ ತನ್ನ 'ಗದಾಯುದ್ಧ'ದಲ್ಲಿ ದುರ್ಯೊಧನನನ್ನು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯವನಂತೆ ಚಿತ್ರಿಸಿರುವುದು ಇಷ್ಟವಿಲ್ಲ. ಆದರೆ 'ಮಹಾಕ್ಷತ್ರಿಯ'ದಲ್ಲಿ ನಹುಷನನ್ನು ಒಳ್ಳೆಯ ಪಾತ್ರವನ್ನಾಗಿ ಚಿತ್ರಿಸಿರುವುದು ಬಹಳ ರುಚಿಸಿತು. ನನ್ನ ಪೂರ್ವಗ್ರಹಗಳೇ ಇದಕ್ಕೆ ಕಾರಣವಾದರೂ, ಕೇವಲ ಒಂದು ಕಾದಂಬರಿಯ ದೃಷ್ಟಿಯಿಂದ ನೋಡಿದರೂ 'ಮಹಾಕ್ಷತ್ರಿಯ' ಒಂದು ಉತ್ತಮೋತ್ತಮವಾದ ಕೃತಿ.

ದೇವುಡು ಅವರ ಕಾದಂಬರಿಗಳ ಶೈಲಿ ಇತರರ ಶೈಲಿಗಿಂತ ಭಿನ್ನ. ಅವರ ಭಾಷೆ ಸಂಸ್ಕೃತಭೂಯಿಷ್ಠವಾಗಿ, ಅರ್ಥಮಾಡಿಕೊಳ್ಳಲು ಸ್ವಲ್ಪ ಕಷ್ಟವೇ ಎಂದೆನ್ನಬಹುದು. ಅವರು ಹೇಳುವ ವಿಷಯದ ಬೋಧೆಯಾಗುವುದು ಇನ್ನೂ ಕಷ್ಟತರ (ನನ್ನ ಪತಿ ಹೇಳುವಂತೆ, ಅವರ ಕಾದಂಬರಿಯನ್ನು ಓದುವ ಬದಲು ಯಾವುದಾದರೂ ಉಪನಿಷತ್ತನ್ನೇ ಓದಬಹುದು!). ಆದರೆ ಅವರ ಭಾಷೆಯನ್ನೂ, ವಿಷಯವನ್ನೂ ಅರ್ಥ ಮಾಡಿಕೊಂಡರೆ ಆಗುವ ಆನಂದ, ಸಿಗುವ ತೃಪ್ತಿ ಮಾತ್ರ ಅನನ್ಯಸಾಧ್ಯ. ಅವರು ಬರೆದಿರುವ ಅನೇಕ ವಿಷಯಗಳು ಸಾಧನೆಯಿಂದ ಮತ್ತು ಅನುಭವದಿಂದ ಅವರಿಗೆ ಗೋಚರವಾದವು ಎಂಬುದನ್ನು ನೆನೆದರೆ ರೋಮಾಂಚನವಾಗುತ್ತದೆ. ವಸ್ತುಗಳನ್ನೂ ಸಂದರ್ಭಗಳನ್ನೂ ಕಣ್ಣಿಗೆ ಕಟ್ಟುವಂತೆ, ಅಲಂಕಾರಯುತವಾಗಿ ವರ್ಣನೆ ಮಾಡುವಲ್ಲಿ ಇನ್ನಾರೂ ದೇವುಡು ಅವರನ್ನು ಸರಿಗಟ್ಟಲಾರರು.

ದೇವುಡು ಅವರ ಇತರ ಪುಸ್ತಕಗಳು 'ಮಹಾಬ್ರಾಹ್ಮಣ' (ವಿಶ್ವಾಮಿತ್ರ ಬ್ರಹ್ಮರ್ಷಿಯಾದ ಕಥೆ), 'ಮಹಾದರ್ಶನ' (ಯಾಜ್ಞವಲ್ಕ್ಯರು ಶುಕ್ಲಯಜುರ್ವೇದವನ್ನು ಪಡೆದು 'ಸರ್ವಜ್ಞ'ನೆಂದು ಪುರಸ್ಕೃತರಾದ ಕಥೆ), ಮತ್ತು 'ಮಯೂರ' (ಮಯೂರವರ್ಮ ಪಲ್ಲವರನ್ನು ಸೋಲಿಸಿ ಕದಂಬರಾಜ್ಯಸ್ಥಾಪನೆಗೈದ ಕಥೆ - ಈ ಕಾದಂಬರಿಯನ್ನು ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಚಿತ್ರಕ್ಕಿಂತ ಕಾದಂಬರಿ ಶತಕೋಟಿಶಃ ಚೆನ್ನಾಗಿದೆಯೆಂದು ನನ್ನ ಅಭಿಪ್ರಾಯ). ಮೂರೂ ಉತ್ತಮವಾದ ಕಾದಂಬರಿಗಳೇ. ಈ ಪುಸ್ತಕಗಳನ್ನು ಓದಿ ಮುಗಿಸಿದಾಗ ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲುಳಿಯುವುದು ಶಾಂತಭಾವ.

ಒಂದು ಮಾರ್ಕರ್ ನ ದಯೆಯಿಂದ, ನನ್ನ ಮನಸ್ಸಿನಲ್ಲೂ ಈಗ ಇರುವುದು ಶಾಂತಭಾವ!

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Corporate responsibility

I do not watch serials on TV, but recently I happened to watch a few minutes of the kannada serial 'Minchu', directed by T.N. Seetharam.

What was going on was this. X, the managing director of a company, has an assistant Y. Now, there is another person Z, who is in need of money for her daughter's wedding, and approaches the finance department of the company for assistance. Z has already taken a housing loan and is still repaying it. Because of that, the finance department agrees to loan only a small amount of money. Z approaches Y, who takes her case to the MD and convinces the MD to increase the loan amount.

Okay, this was just an instance in a TV serial. But it was directed by Seetharam, and we can be sure that he thought it out well, before bringing it on screen. No one can deny that a company is responsible for its employees. But there is only so much anybody can do for anybody else. Even when it is possible, it is not right to cross those limits. What if all the employees of the company (or even half of them, for that matter), ask for loans, for genuine reasons? What would X have done?

Being complacent that someone higher-up is going to bail one out of all difficulties is bad. Unfortunately, I guess that is how we humans are wired (I sometimes wonder if it is just an Indian trait!). Some people always expect that rich companies help mend the bad roads, help government-run schools, and generally donate money generously for all causes.

Recently, I read an article that I received by email, written by Ravi Belagere. It was an open letter to Sudha Murthy. I respect Ravi Belagere a lot for his views, but this article struck me as very odd. Apparently M.P. Prakash, our erstwhile Dy. Chief minister, told Ravi Belagere that he asked all the IT majors to donate money for the development of infrastructure and various other things, and apparently all of them replied that "they would get back on this issue", but have not gotten back since then.

That is not all. Belagere rants about how all flyovers are near the IT offices, how the rich IT companies do not care about the necessities of the farmer whose land was destroyed by floods and about poor children who do not have access to education, how Bangalore became so very costly because of the IT companies.

To an extent, what he says is true. There is too much immigration from other parts of India to Bangalore. Cost of living is escalating. Rents have touched an all-time high. The traffic-situation is abysmal. Rather than spend evenings quietly with books, the youth prefer to hang out at malls. Ask any highschool kid, he/she wants to be a software engineer and nothing else. It is like they do not have any rolemodel in any other field. Good teachers, scientists and the like are hardly to be found. These developments are not good.

But how wise is it to blame the IT industry for everything? Businesses are there because they are in demand. An IT company exists because there are sponsors and shareholders and customers. And people work for IT companies because they pay them enough money to give good education to their kids and build bigger houses. Even IT companies get tax subsidies from the government because they generate revenue and create more wealth. Engineering colleges hiked their fees because of the high salaries the students may get once they finish their education.

And it is not like the IT companies do not do anything for the society. At R's company, there was this quarterly event where each person of the team was paired with a kid from a nearby government school. At the end of the event, R gave him his phone number, and asked him to call if he needed any help. True, such events are few and far between, but that is a start, and a good one at that. RSS has a few orphanages and schools ('anaatha shishu nivaasa', 'aruna chetana', etc) that thrive on donations by 'Professionals in Seva'. The Infosys Foundation has also done a lot of social work.

As harsh as it may sound, companies are answerable to their shareholders, and that is how their policies are made. M.P Prakash cannot complain against global companies without plugging the corrupt holes in his own ministry.

Wednesday, July 11, 2007

ತುಂಟ ಕರಡಿ ತನ್ನ ತಮ್ಮನಿಗೆ ಹೇಳಿದ್ದು

ಚಿತ್ರಕವನ ಒಂಭತ್ತನೆಯ ಚಿತ್ರಕ್ಕಾಗಿ ಬರೆದ ಪದ್ಯ.

ಕಿಟಕಿಯ ಸರಳುಗಳಾಚೆಯ ಜಗವದು
ಎಷ್ಟು ಸುಂದರವು, ನೋಡಿದೆಯಾ?
ಚಿಗುರಿದ ಮರಗಳು, ಅರಳಿದ ಹೂಗಳು
ಕರೆದಿವೆ ನಮ್ಮನು, ಕೇಳಿದೆಯಾ?

ಮಾವಿನ ಮರದಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಜೇನನ್ನು
ಸವಿಯಲು ಸಹಚರನಾಗುವೆಯಾ?
ಹಲಸಿನ ಹಣ್ಣನು ಮೆಲ್ಲನೆ ಬಿಡಿಸುತ
ಮೆಲ್ಲಲು ನೀ ಜತೆಗೂಡುವೆಯಾ?

ನಿದ್ದೆಯ ಹೊತ್ತಲಿ ನೀರಲಾಡಿದ್ದು
ಅಮ್ಮಗೆ ನೀನೇ ಹೇಳಿದೆಯಾ?
ಪಕ್ಕದ ಹಳ್ಳಿಯ ಜನರ ಕೆಣಕಿದ್ದು
ಅವಳಿಗೆ ಕೋಪವ ತರಿಸಿದೆಯಾ?

ನಮ್ಮ ಚೇಷ್ಟೆಗಳು ಮೀರಿದವೇ ಮಿತಿ?
ಚಿಣ್ಣರ ಮೇಲೆಯೆ ಹಠ ಸರಿಯಾ?
ಕೂಡಿ ಹಾಕಿಹಳು ಅಮ್ಮನು ನಮ್ಮನು
ಏನ ಮಾಡುವುದು, ಯೋಚಿಸೆಯಾ?

Thursday, July 05, 2007

'Complications' by Atul Gawande

Writing about books has two positive results and one negative. The positive results first. One -I never run out of subjects provided I keep on reading new books, and two - suppose I want to remind myself of this book, say a few years later, I can just read this review of mine. I have often felt the need for the latter. The negative result - I will be writing about things I have not experienced personally. Many of the ideas will not be my own. But I am willing to take that risk. Henceforth I plan to write about all the interesting books I read. I hope to intersperse the "book-review posts" with other subjects, but let that be for now.

The latest book I read, 'Complications' written by Atul Gawande, was very, very interesting, and it is an understatement. I have been interested in the medical field for as long as I remember. When I go to the doctor either as a patient or as the patient's relative, I am informed. I usually have a fair idea of the side effects of the medicines prescribed. However, after reading 'Complications', I realized how inadequate all that was. It was an epiphany. I trust a couple of doctors implicitly, and the fact that they too can be fallible, is scary, but true. The book talks about mistakes that even good doctors might make, and that wee bit of extra cautiousness that has often saved patients' lives.

Gawande writes with the clinical precision and detachment capable only of a surgeon. And yet there is humanity, there are the intense emotions that even doctors experience. There is not a dull chapter, or even a dull sentence in the book. It could be called delightful, if the subject were not so morbid and serious.

I remember freaking out when I went to the hospital at an unearthly hour and saw the young, inexperienced duty doctor instead of my usual gynecologist. One cannot deny that more experience makes better doctors. And age does matter. Most people I have met are more comfortable with old, experienced doctors than younger doctors with sophisticated degrees. Gawande states an instance where experience came in real handy. A patient came in with a reddened and swollen leg. All the indications were pointing toward cellulitis, a common but treatable infection. But just weeks ago, Gawande had lost one of his patients to necrotizing fasciitis, a rare and fatal bacterial infection that can be treated surgically, only in the very initial stage. (These bacteria, usually strains of streptococcus A, can enter the body through a "wound" as small as a pinprick.) His experience made him order a biopsy and his fears were indeed true. The patient had most of the tissue removed from her leg, but she survived. What would have happened to her if the doctor did not have this kind of an experience earlier? Would the warning bells have sounded even then? It is really hard to say!

There is also this matter of statistics. Cellulitis is a common infection. And about 5% of the cases, thought to be cellulitis at first, turn out to be necrotizing faciitis. Does this help the doctor make a decision on whether the patient in front of him right then has one or the other? Can a good doctor assume that exactly 5 out of a hundred cellulitis-patients that see him have the flesh-eating bacteria? No! Statistics are there to just comfort and/or caution, but they can never be used as a guideline.

From the days of Hippocrates and our own Sushruta, Medical Science has been improving. But newer technology has its own costs. I remember feeling elated when I read about "laparoscopic cholesystectomy" in my high school days. I thought of all the lives that would be saved because of the new technology. The thought that never came to me till I read "Complications" was the learning curve of the doctors. Gawande describes a laparoscopic cholesystectomy (the removal of the gall bladder) that he performed. Only after reading that did I realize how complicated it was, how difficult it was to learn new techniques. Doctors, like all others, take time to learn. But unlike us engineers, their experiments are with life; the stakes are high. One mistake, just half a second of haziness while wielding the scalpel can kill. Okay, I may be exaggerating, but the point is that doctors are responsible for the most precious things in this world.

And they deserve that responsibility. Risks have to be taken if lives are to be saved. Gawande talks about an unusual surgery, the gastric bypass surgery. (There was a report about this surgery in this week's 'Health' supplement of the Indian Express). In this surgery, the stomach is stapled, thereby reducing its size, and about a metre of the small intestine is bypassed, so that less food is absorbed. This is the best cure now available for morbid obesity. I mean, just think of the capability of one four-hour surgery! Many people are leading healthy and happy lives because of the surgery. So, at some point, a decision has to be made. For doctors, however, difficult decisions have to be made all the time.

In the Indian tradition, we say that one should trust the doctor completely. Indeed, it is said that the result is proportional to our trust. From a psychological perspective, this makes complete sense. Though *all* our illnesses are not rooted in the mind, many of them are. Therefore, trusting the doctor is important. But how far do we go? Ultimately it is our own body we are talking about. In Kannada they say 'ಹೊಸ ವೈದ್ಯರಿಗಿಂತ ಹಳೆ ರೋಗಿಯೇ ಮೇಲು', which is true to some extent (My grandma used to do this. She had diabetes, and whenever she ate an extra sweet, she would take a little more of her diabetes medication, without consulting the doctor!). There should be a sort of a compromise between the doctor and the patient as to who listens to whom, to what extent.

'Complications' got me started on thinking about a related thing. There are happy endings and sad endings. But, isn't 'Life' mysterious? A person who has four heart attacks may survive and thrive, whereas another may die of a pinprick. A pacemaker can help an ailing heart, a ventilator can substitute the lungs and a dialysis machine, the kidneys. What is the nature of that "one thing" that keeps all these and more working together in so much harmony that if one organ fails, all the others gradually fail, too. I am delving into Philosophy here, but isn't that a question worth considering?