Ashok G.V.

I finally read “Lolita” and what a surreal reading experience it was. The story is about an adult man marrying an adult woman with the sole purpose of sexually exploiting her teenage daughter, which design he successfully executes through a combination of plain luck, deceit, fear and seduction. The summary itself is quite revolting, but alas every deed has a context and every context complicates our role to pass judgement.

Yet as a story, it is not so much the underlining premise that is disturbing as much as the narrative itself. Not only does the protagonist condemn himself to his less than palatable designs, but infuses a sense of dark humour centered around the hopelessness of the situation. In the result, the reader is often tempted to sympathize with the protagonist and there are brief moments when the genuineness of his love and desires, inspires a hope in the reader that the protagonist should in fact succeed in his efforts to win over and possess Lolita forever. But I must applaud the author, because every time we are fooled by the protagonist into sympathizing with him, the tragedy of Lolita brings us back to reality and reminds us of why the protagonist deserves nothing less than the strictest manifestations of society’s condemnations.

In Lolita’s life, lies the story of millions of girls out there. Both in the United States of America and elsewhere, we have come to terms with a disturbing set of numbers that estimate thousands if not millions of young girls finding themselves entrapped into a life of sexual abuse. While one would hope that these girls are aware of the sheer grotesque nature of the sex inflicted on them, Lolita also reminds us of the more naive of the lot who are yet to come to terms with this evil. When the very innocence that ought to inspire society to abandon its diplomacy and connivance, also inspires the motives towards exploitation among its less desirable members, we owe the Lolita’s of the world a responsibility to help them out of their situation and place them in an environment where they can be children again.

Yet what impressed me about the author, Vladmir Nobokov is the man’s strange yet intuitive understanding of a child sex offender’s personality. The protagonist, albeit being a man of good looks and considerable intelligence boasts of a remarkable incapacity to make any major accomplishments. Where self esteem should be, there is a sense of guilt and deficiency, which constantly provokes our protagonist to seek the sympathies of society. He surmises that his love for Lolita being genuine, requires no act of reciprocation and the same genuineness also creates his case for society to confer some legitimacy to his love for the teenage Lolita. He belongs to a brand of offenders who may not perhaps be violent, but place their own selfish needs over everything else. In the end, we can only conclude that Humbert’s love for Lolita is lesser than his love for himself and his own needs, which only make him more worthy of condemnation.

Yet coming to the complexities of passing judgement on Humbert, I have to say, Nobokov creates a complicated situation. On one hand, when the context is peeled away, Humbert is a scoundrel who deserves nothing short of death. Yet his motive towards revenge on the villain, Claire Quilty is motivated partly by the wrong Quilty inflicted on him, but mostly by the deceit he had imposed on the teenage Lolita. In this premise, we see that Humbert’s hatred for Quilty is as much a hatred of himself for what he did to Lolita. The deviant behaviour towards Lolita apart, Humbert also boasts of a frightful level of honesty and integrity in matters of money, especially concerning Lolita, which also somewhere reveals to us that he shares a strong yet incestuous paternal love for her. But the most compelling case for mercy comes from his  guilt and his perceptive recollection of some of the many things that he did wrong in his life. Vladmir Nobokov, you my friend, are a bloody genius for having woven such a complex character and such a dark story which evokes both the lust for vengeance and the need for compassion at the same time. It is truly a story with many shades of grey and that to me was what made the book truly memorable.

Yes, the narrative is slow and the bits and pieces of French thrown in between provokes annoyance. But the novel holds its own and ultimately doesn’t disappoint. One critique of the book held that Lolita wasn’t given a big enough voice in the book. But it is precisely that, among many others that make Lolita such a dark tragedy, the kind of tragedy that evokes the purest of sorrow. I strongly recommend Lolita. It will offend you, it will provoke you and it will ultimately move you. Lolita is not just a child in a novel, but an immortal soul whose tragic life leaves an unmistakable heaviness in our hearts. In that sense, she is more real than fictional and full credit to Nobokov for breathing life into a story of such complexities.

I had an ocassion to revise some of the lessons in responsibility.

1. The circumstances should not define me, nor can I define the circumstance. I can at best, affect the nature of my relationship with these circumstances.

2. If someone or some people are able to get to me and make me feel bad, it is not a reflection of their character but, it is in fact a reflection of my incompetence and intellectual emptiness.

3. Suffering or pleasure is not a fact, but a perception of a fact. The fact cannot be controlled, but the perception can.

4. Responsibility is an end in itself. No reward should be expected of it.

5. Our ability to do right is not limited by any constraints or lack of comfort. We are better than that and in that acknowledgement lies the path to righteousness of the absolute kind.

6. The guilt that comes with responsibility sometimes is an opportunity to introspect about the mistake made and celebrate the existence of cosmic justice.

7. Good and bad things happen randomly and quite often, for no reason. But we can interpret these events to find meaning. Some element of fiction and romanticism is necessary to find peace

I spent a rather challenging day in an attempt to wrap up the task of filing certain papers at the High Court. The fact that I had do it alone didn’t help things at all, a constraint aggravated by my lack of experience in the more clerical aspects of law practice. Then out of the blue came along a man, one Mr. Amarkanth Rao, an Advocate and a Notary who voluntarily helped me throughout the process. I made it a point to profusely thank him after the filing was done. But the fact that the world had so much good to offer put me in an incredibly good mood for the rest of the day.

In our day to day lives as threads in the complicated social fabric, we often neglect our responsibility to bring out the best in each other. I wonder somewhere have we simply forgotten to give as much as we remember what we are entitled to. Mr. Rao had shown to me the best that the world around me had to offer. And this is not in isolation. Many times when I give way to pedestrians on the road or to a vehicle, I see the sense of happiness and gratitude in some of those characters on the road and it immediately infuses a sense of inner peace. I remain grateful to them for bringing out the best in me. This is perhaps why I refuse to give up, because I can’t help but wonder if there is good in all of us waiting to be invoked.

After many many days, today I have found the latitude to sit down and really think about where I wish to go. The success in the past few days has only believe stronger than ever that achievements lead only to a sense of emptiness. Victory leaves only a sense of void.

I have been left speechless by the words of those who suggest that there is a bright future for me, financially and in terms of the reputation I supposedly will garner. The faith people continue to invest in what I can achieve professionally is even more surreal. I am trying to make sense of it all and yet I am at a loss to understand what I am to make of all this? It is strange how little meaning money holds once it goes out of one’s hands. It is even more strange when on one day the audience in the court hall I am arguing in are laughing at the humiliation inflicted on me and on another day, another audience is in awe of the appreciation I have gathered. How dynamic and undependable these things are? Yet we are committed to letting our state of mind be defined by these instabilities and this chaos? Yep the jokes on us!

But I will share what has empowered me tremendously and what I suspect will help me unleash myself. In the silence that I find every night, I have found more speech and wisdom than ever before. In solitude, I have found a companion that empowers me continuously. In menial labour, I have found peace that 7 years in the field of law has yet to provide. Strangely, the more alone I am, the more capable I feel of society and company. I am able to see more of the art that Keigo Higashino describes in the devotion of suspect x. In defining my sense of loyalty and standing by it, without fear of consequences, I have found a strength that makes my heart swell in pride. I find comfort in acknowledging my ignorance and find exhilaration in the pursuit of knowledge.

What is my sense of an ideal future? Even if I find myself capable, I will neither be a judge nor a very successful/reputed lawyer. I will instead work towards a small cottage, with a garden. I will crave for a teaching job, one that will help me continue the worship of knowledge. I will write and lay bare my entire personality and history retaining anonymity of all those who were part of it, simply for the sake of writing it down. I would probably try and live each day in its own.   I will probably move away from everything and everyone I have become familiar with and familiar to and celebrate the anonymity unless of course I find a companion with whom I can share a certain kind of emotional and intellectual bond defined by a sense of mutual sensitivity. My days will begin with music and end with it. I will read more books than what I have read in 24 years and revel in the magic that words can convey. I shall probably watch every good movie there is to watch. I will celebrate withering away into oblivion, slowly but surely. In short, I will find that happiness that comes from being and not from doing…

I run the risk of never find what I want to find. Yet these romantic ideas often motivate one to look forward to tomorrow as it does to me. I long to move away from the need for fame and find all the validation I need from within. In the past few days, I have come closer to that than ever before

I recollect a guest lecture I had delivered, not too long ago, to students of a leading management college on sexual harassment laws. As I explained some of the illustrations of what has been held as sexual harassment, one male student objected on the ground that almost anything he could say to a woman would be construed as sexual harassment. A curious predicament indeed and thats often the argument against strong women rights legislations such as anti stalking provisions, although I myself would not subscribe to such criticisms.

Because for me, human rights has the answer to this predicament. First of all, when you like a girl, for that feeling to be genuine, there has to be a most basic sense of respect for her autonomy and rights as a human being. Without that basic sense of decency and respect for her human rights, you really should not stand a chance with her. So when she says no, expressly or impliedly, respect her choice to say no and back off.

Having said that, you do owe it to yourself and to the girl you like, to make your feelings clear. There is no harm in professing your interest to date a girl (provided she is not underage), and perhaps you owe it to yourself and the prospects of happiness, to atleast try. But do so in a sensitive manner which appreciates her perception of what is an acceptable form of proposition and what is not. The sensitivity is possible and exists as an instinct only when there is that underlining sense of respect.

At the end of the day, understand that if the answer is no, it is not because you are deficient or not living up to her standards. It simply means that you don’t meet a particular criterion she has in mind. The rejection has to be seen in perspective. It is not such much an insult to your existence, as much as it is simply a choice she is exercising, because she has that right in the first place!  The absolute truth is that her right to say no need not be accompanied by reasoning. A ‘no’, can simply exist without any reason and that has to be respected at all costs. This is totally non-negotiable.

Dating or for that matter, gender interaction itself, are not an exact science. It is a very complicated and often challenging facet of human existence. Being turned down or relationships ending happen just as frequently, if not more frequently, than things going right. But a strong sense of self esteem and self confidence will ensure that the girl who is the object of your affections never feels uncomfortable.

As far as the ladies are concerned, well all I can say is assert yourself whenever you feel the need to do so. Convey your response boldly and without hesitation. Remember, if he doesn’t take it in the right spirit, its his problem and not yours. After all as the line in the movie “Hitch” goes,

“Basic principles (of dating and love)….there are none…” (emphasis supplied)

At the heart of the human crisis lies the need to reconcile man’s instincts towards survival with his need for society. Aristotle only told one side of the story when he said that any man who feels he can live without society must be a god or a beast. We may be conscious of our nature as social animals, but doesn’t mean we enjoy it all that much.

Policy making or legislations represent at the most fundamental level, especially in a democracy conscious of human rights,  the effort to reconcile a person’s survival interests with his need for society. The scale of challenges on this front is way too many and much too overwhelming. When we complain about beautiful welfare legislations failing, its perhaps because it does not adequately account for the constraints that make welfare policies necessary in the first place, much as I realized in the course of a beautiful presentation a representative of Doctors of Seva made yesterday at a friend’s place.

As a lawyer, I represent the overall eco system in place to ensure that the policies are being adapted and implemented to suit specific needs. Judicial Precedents are after all nothing but the state’s success in ensuring that the legislations it promulgates are interpreted in a manner which is meaningful to those who need the protection of these legislations. Yet as much as we like to believe that somewhere courts fill the lacunae left by legislative insensitivity or vacuum, even precedents are nothing but a hastily administered medicine to cure a previously uncontemplated disease.

As we endorse more and more libertarian views, policy makers are increasingly being accused of being insensitive to the opinion of the individual at the grassroot. Our perceptions of democracy are now evolving. From the least of the evils, in terms of governance models, the incompetence of democracy on various levels are now being perceived all over. Many opine, not without due reason, that democracy is the benevolent dictatorship of the majority, human rights and civil liberties being the basis for the benevolence. The cynic’s views are perhaps motivated by a crumbling system that is barely able to inject the necessary cures as quickly as the diseases or the rot surface.

Yet we are left back at ground zero, unable to find the answer to the query on individual liberties versus need for society. I suspect policy makers will never truly be able to answer that question. What we need perhaps is not the perfect policy, but to infuse into people a sense of being heard which might undermine their perception of the policies themselves as being ill conceived and poor. On the other side of the spectrum, we as people we need to be sensitive to the inherent imperfections across all policies. Through sustained dialogue, we could eventually find a place where competing interests are all addressed, but perhaps not at the same time.

It is perhaps for this reason that the likes of Gandhi and Marx suggested the notion of a stateless society as the ideal, where utopian individuals see their individual needs and their need for society no longer being in conflict, but in tune with each other. In that idealism, bereft of reality, do we find the answer to the challenges to policy making. The answer is simple then, we just need to work towards becoming better individuals. So simple, yet so difficult to pursue, isn’t it?

The building where my firm functions out of, is owned by a religious body, which has placed a watchman to keep an eye out for trouble. One of our interns happens to be a girl who is an exceptionally motivated and smart young lady with tremendous potential. But her crime is that she is a 20 year old girl and our problem is that we are a bunch of professionals around 24-25 years of age. So now the landlord apparently wants the girl to leave the office by 7 in the evening and the word is put through the watchman. But here is the catch, if she finishes law school at 5 and makes it to our office at 5:30 and has to leave by 7 with a tea break in between, what work is she doing?

Here we are, as a firm with a good business law practice and with a sincere pro bono program and forget encouragement from the world around, this is positive annoyance and irritation. I cannot bear to succumb to this mandate and have the girl leave early or possibly consider asking her to work out of home. Any workaround to this issue seems like abetting this extreme act of discrimination, one directed at her as a woman and to us as young adults.

Yet I cant help but laugh at the poverty of good thoughts these blokes suffer from. The situation can either be seen as a bunch of young professionals doing something worthwhile with their lives or it can be looked at from the point of the culture of sex and drugs that people my age are unfairly accused off as a matter of generalization. Yet we are inclined to adopt the perceptibly more nefarious school of thought as a population aren’t we?

Slowly but surely, we are heading towards change as a firm. There will be challenges and hurdles no matter what path we choose. But I wonder if we will be forced to choose between our principles or the location of our office? If matter comes to thus, a tough but necessary decision will have to be taken.

Entrepreneurship is the most worthwhile endeavour, regardless of one’s fate in this journey. Those of us who have taken up this facet of professional life will testify that the business is the wife and everyone else in our lives become mistresses. The concept of weekends, weekdays, holidays, etc. are all non-existent and it is a 24/7 engagement no matter how much we wish for things to be otherwise. Yet it is not something that can be abandoned at all. The journey is exhilarating and completely satisfying and the joy cannot be substituted with anything else.

One of the most tricky aspects of management is handling the human resources. Especially in the legal services industry, we have to constantly be mindful of the fact that people drive businesses and processes are dependent on people. Human Resources are not just the biggest assets of a law firm, but they are the foundations on which law practice is built. I say this because unlike any other field, the role of the human mind and the demand for its ingenuity is ever evolving in this line of work.

Yet the paralegals, the associates and the non-partner staff are the unsung heroes in the legal services sector. Not too long ago, I was among their ranks when I was a student of law. My position as a junior associate back in 2007, notwithstanding the relatively higher responsibility and dignity the position came with as opposed to an intern, allowed me the benefit of understanding the core H.R. challenges in a law firm. Around this experience has also come a certain understanding which I now wish to share.

1. Embrace the changing dynamics: The yesteryear job market was all amount too many people competing for too few jobs. In this atmosphere the employer was at a vantage point. It was not the era of economic boom and a salary offered much security and stability. Today the times are different. Too many jobs and too few people seem to be the norm. The focus is no longer on salary alone but also dignity, work satisfaction and facilitation of a healthy work-life balance. It is thus, not sufficient if one’s employees are being paid. One has to be sensitive to their mindset, value systems and emotions, failing which attrition is not too far away.

2.Stick it to the Carrot and the Stick: Human Beings are rational beings. The carrot and the stick approach undermines your employees and reduces them to animals who, notwithstanding the whack from the whip, will still come crawling back when shown the carrot. Entrepreneurship is all about ownership and responsibility and inculcating that as a way of life among all stake holders, particularly the employees. Don’t undermine them with the carrot and stick policy. Hold them accountable, as you would hold a team mate, when work is not done. But don’t be patronizing about it. Similarly thank them when something is done, not because they are your servant and you are being magnanimous, but because they deserve it!

3. Collective Approach: We all hate it when the work we allot is not done. It sucks. We feel angry, frustrated and our ego accuses us of emasculation. But, bottom line, the problem still exists. Instead, sit down with the person responsible for the default in an informal private setting. Inquire into the causes that led to the default and objectively analyze the sustainability of these causes. Map out solutions and transfer the onus of implementation, atleast partly to the concerned employee. Not only will this motivate your employees to come clean with their grievances to facilitate preventive action the next time around, but critical system failures, which legitimately exist will come to light, which, in the long run ensure greater efficiency and approach. Encourage them when they do things well with genuine compliments and hold them accountable, in an unemotional manner, when they go wrong. It has to be done. But do it because you are first among equals and not because you are the master and they, your servant! Statements like “I don’t care what went wrong, bottom line you didnt get the job done and therefore you are useless” are to be strictly avoided at all costs.

4. Sensitivity- The untold story: We all have strengths and limitations and we all have our egoes. Some people would not like to do certain kinds of work and some people are willing to do every kind of work that exists. Learn to balance it out between such competing interests and be sensitive to them. If a work, not conducive of an employee’s qualification and experience, needs to be done by him, ask a favour as a friend rather than imposing it on him. It is a process of rapport building and one needs to be intuitive on these areas.

4. Objective Distance: In the work place, we are neither friends nor foes. We are simply people who have come together to achieve some goals, financial and non-financial together. Office politics is the anti thesis of efficient goal achievement, so neither encourage it nor initiate it. Have honest weekly team meetings to understand where the staff is coming from and what they wish to offer as critique of your management skills. As a small business, we may not be able to offer salaries of large corporations, but we can create a democratic atmosphere where everyone is brainstorming on increasing efficiency and decreasing wastage. Keep a safe distance and ensure things are done in a collaborative and participative manner.

What I have shared is not a key driver of success or a one stop miracle maker. It is some insights I believe to be true based on my experience managing members in my own team. It may work for some, it may not work for all. But the pitfalls from not implementing some of the above observations are all too obvious to be ignored. Hope this helps!

I had the occasion to visit the Ramakrishna Ashram in Mysore recently. During my school days, I was heavily drawn to the works of Swami Vivekananda. He had an intuitive understanding of the politics that had entered the sphere of religion and spirituality and undermined them by boldly advocating a school of thought re-emphasized  human values. My particular admiration was however towards the speech at parliament of world religions where he sought to distinguish himself not by advocating hinduism as the best religion, but rather advocating a school of thought that attempted to dilute or erase the polarization of spiritual means by affixing religious brand names. Yet history is to be read in context of the times it describes. Beneath the phenomenally enlightened values Swami Vivekananda advocated in the Parliament of World Religions, lay a core idea, the idea being human beings are capable of being and doing good and conflict, anger, insecurity and jealousy in the name of God is not who we are or what we could be! His courage lay in this faith in mankind, one we seldom acknowledge or remember.

I look at all this and then go back to the Ramakrishna Ashram experience which was all too recent. On christmas occasions, the ashram served fruit salad free of cost. It celebrates all forms of celebrating spirituality, regardless of nomenclature or form. The Bhajans although Sanskrit Hymns carry an addictive serenity in them that resonate with everyone, regardless of what religion one belongs to, a fact affirmed by the presence of a large number of foreigners then. This was not a reactive institution at all. This institution looks inwards, identifies what it could do to make the lives of people better, regardless of religion and quietly goes about doing it.

The brand of followers Swami Vivekananda has gathered in recent times seem to deviate from this line of thought though and that is rather unfortunate. Frequently, the Swami’s good words are being repeated by those who have entered the sphere of religious politics and whose alarmist tones against other cultures are out of tune with today’s times. To this, I am sure to provoke references to the inflammatory speeches of fundamentalist preachers around the world as an argument to justify the alarmist’s views. But may I remind that the Swami did not play that game and defeated the patronizing plagues by emphasizing the importance of tolerance, respect and universality. I therefore remain skeptical about the organizations that proclaim their love for the Swami for I fear that they will turn his wisdom into rhetoric which is perhaps the worst dishonor we can do to this man’s legacy.

The modern day religion cannot survive by forcefully clinging on to the histories of human civilization. It cannot blindly adhere to and advocate the traditions of the past without having the good sense to review the same for merits and demerits. The modern day religion is to be mindful of the objective realities emerging in today’s times, namely human rights and its children-women and child rights. For its influence to survive, it needs to accommodate these objective realities in its discourses. On a more simple note, it has to learn to love and not judge. It has to learn to embrace and tolerate, rather than distance itself or undermine. It cannot be insecure and fearful and spewing venom anymore. It has to be grounded in the notion of universality and boldly advocate more dialogue and more mingling between people. For any religion to survive in today’s times, it has to start walking towards diluting cultural differences and enforcing the notion that beneath the surface, we are all the same. That was the Swami’s vision and it is precisely that aspect of the man’s ideology that makes him stand out in the history of the world.

“I may not like what you are saying, but I will defend till death, your right to say it.”-Voltaire

As lawyers, our first and foremost duty is to the letter and spirit of the law. It is drilled in to us that we are first and foremost, officers of the court and by that measure the truth is what we pursue and arriving at it, is what we facilitate. Around this concept lies an elaborate body of ethics, one that I have come to deeply admire, not only because they enforce a higher state of existence, but because they have come to create the job that I love so madly.

Yet I ask myself, where the hell are the gentlemen of the bar? Long ago at the initial stages of my court practice, I represented a defendant in a case where there were three other such defendants. One of them had filed an application seeking an interim order. I asked that Defendant Advocate’s junior, rather politely, for a copy of the Application only for him to reply, “I don’t owe you the application”. I told I am advised of his discretion in the matter but simply invoked his good graces on the grounds of professional courtesy and he finally obliged.

Today in a similar situation, I merely asked my fellow Defendant Advocate if the opponents had filed their reply to our pleadings only to be retorted with the statement “I don’t have to tell you the answer. Go inside and inquire”. I could not help but laugh in his face for the only thing that came into my mind was the catch phrase of the song “Why this Kolaveri?”All that changed when I finally argued the matter, but a certain perspective based on the oldest and most noble values need to be instilled among the practitioners.

Or perhaps is it because I am a younger member of the bar? From the encounter with today’s attorney, I cannot help but wonder if he assumed I am an employee at an attorney’s office, a junior of sorts and hence it was insulting of me to even approach him when he is a more senior member of the bar. Sadly, this arbitrariness starts at law school itself when the more senior batches stake claim to a lot of privileges with scant regard to merits; a wholly incorrect and untenable attitude.

Where are the Gentlemen of the bar? Most attorneys I see today have scant respect for each other and therefore the court or the law itself. The job is never personal and we are all there to ensure that whatever law exists, is applied in the right perspective for the right reasons to achieve the right goals. When we concede to the correctness of this statement, there exists no justification for the way lawyers treat each other, especially the younger members of the bar

My appeal to law students is to really rise above such pettiness. We can do justice to our clients, to the courts and to our opponents without having to wrongfully deprieve anyone of what they are rightfully entitled to. Politeness and courtesy are not gifts we give to others, but also a sub conscious projection of our own entitlement to such dignity and respect. It is an appeal that we treat each other with some basic sense of respect and dignity. If the more senior members of the bar cannot adopt this mindset, then perhaps their claims of privilege as seniors itself remains unfounded.

Regardless of reciprocity, I am a firm believer in conducting myself in a fair, polite and dignified manner with my opponents. The ancient rules of war themselves mandate that enemies also be treated with respect and this was core to the principles of Dharma. I am not here to unduly hurt anyone, nor will I ever walk that path. I am here simply because of a passionate love for the job and with that view, I simply cannot imagine being discourteous or impolite. If this means I am an amateur, so be it. But I will never try and claim stakes to privileges simply because I was born earlier and therefore older; for in that thought, lies laziness, lack of vision and lack of self respect all of which I hope to avoid for the remainder of my life.