The Lazy Man’s Guide to the CSE

For Mechanical Engineering Preparation - click here

I am writing this piece, because, despite my repeated declaration of my not having any pronounced ability or ‘formula’ for success in the CSE, my inbox is getting inundated with requests for ‘tips’ – from persons not having Mechanical Engineering as an optional subject. I may assume I have some sort of command over Mechanical Engineering optional, and as a duty towards fellow strugglers, I have written an article on the same. However, many do insist that I tell them about the ‘rest of my preparation’, and they would not take no for an answer. So, here it goes.

First of all, the disclaimers. I took the exams in the pre-2013 syllabus era. Some of the additions done to the GS syllabus are not covered here, simply because I did not read those topics while preparing, and I would be lying if I say I read those topics now. However, had I been writing under the new pattern, I’m sure the strategy would not have changed much. My CSE strategy was based solely on my growing grip over Mechanical Engineering. It took time, and took mental effort, and yielded quite good marks – over all my three attempts. So, the ‘rest of my strategy’ was basically reading something that should be covered in less time, and yield decent scores – not ‘selection grade’ scores – that responsibility rested on Mechanical Engineering. In fact, over my three attempts, which included two selections, I never crossed 300 even once in my second optional! My GS scores were also quite pedestrian. However, paired with a solid first optional, like Mech, it was a feasible strategy. It was like the Indian Cricket Team of the 1990’s – you had Sachin Tendulkar, and then you had to pick up the next 10 players to make up the numbers. My point is – this is a “lazy man’s strategy” – involves less efforts, for the maximum “marks to effort ratio” – not necessarily the maximum marks. If you have a reliable optional subject, like I had, then you may follow this strategy, and then too, at your own risk.

General Studies – static and dynamic

General Studies has two parts – the static, and the dynamic. The static comprises of things that do not change – generally – like History, Political Science, Geography, Culture etc. The dynamic comprises of things like Contemporary Affairs, Environmental Affairs, Foreign Affairs, Economic Affairs, and practically anything under the sun, which has appeared in any newspaper or magazine in the country. There are separate ways to deal with both. There is a third category, which involves the use of the static knowledge to explain dynamic affairs. Dealing with it is more of a skill, which can be developed in many ways – writing a blog like this may be one of them!

Static

Whatever you do, it is always advisable to get a good GS Compendium. GS Compendiums are basically compilations on the various GS topics, from various renowned books and publications, in one place. Since the lessons need to be summarized, they usually cut through the bullsh*t that authors of the original books often put in to make their books thicker. Like, I got the Tata McGraw Hill General Studies Manual. It is a hefty book – but half of it is exercises. What remains of the book is divided almost equally between the sciences and the humanities. If you are a science / engineering student, you may not need to touch the science part (except if you had no Biology in XII – then that portion may require a quick look). What remains is some 300-400 pages dense with pure, relevant facts – in History (including the National Movement), Geography, Political Science and basic Economics. Just read it twice, thrice, as long as it takes to get it all crammed in. Believe me, this would be the most remunerative quantum of effort you put in in the course of CSE preparation. If you have more time, and a higher pain-threshold, you can always go for reading the books mentioned as ‘Sources’ in the TMH GS Manual. The NCERT textbooks for Intermediate Geography are also good. However, they are to be tried only after being thorough with the Manual.

Dynamic

Dynamic part has gained preponderance in the GS papers over the years. As I said, anything under the sun can be asked under this. It is not possible to be ‘fully prepared’ for this. It is not feasible to be even ‘half prepared’. You can only maximize what you read, and, if you are a believer, pray that enough questions come from what you read. So, reading a good newspaper is a requirement. Many swear by ‘The Hindu’; I personally preferred ‘The Indian Express’ – especially since it had good articles on Economics – my other optional. Both are good newspapers, and either would do equally well.

Reading the paper has to be done a bit methodically. The paper has two broad parts – the news, and the ‘Opinions / Editorials’ (Oped). The news parts needs to be run through speedily. Any important event – a death, award, inauguration, appointment, wedding, book release, commission reports, NGO reports, discoveries, inventions, Supreme Court Cases – the 2 marker stuff, may be noted down. Should hardly take 10-20 minutes to do this. However, the Oped part needs to be read more coolly, with concentration. One should try to have a ‘mental debate’ with the views expressed by the authors of the article. If one has time, it is better to read the opinion pages of both the papers, as they often project the Left and the Right view, and it helps the reader develop a balanced view on most issues. However, even reading a single paper, with a conscious effort at mental debate, can help you develop good substance of your own.

Other than the papers, one source, which is quite good, even if terribly boring, is the Front Line Magazine. It takes care of a part of the Foreign Affairs and the Environmental Affairs, by bringing out obscure issues from nowhere into the limelight. Read it, if you have the stomach.

Internet and other stuff

Internet can be scoured for a variety of aids – one can go through the websites of RBI, MoEF, MEA etc. for some more ideas on the Economic, Environmental and Foreign Affairs. Another important website is that of the Press Information Bureau - which lists important news directly related to the Union Government and its policies - in fact, this site should be followed as religiously as the newspapers. Internet can also be used to find summaries of important documents – like the Economic Survey, the General Budget etc. In my honest opinion – reading the whole text of these documents can be regarded as misallocation of time – the summaries should equip one enough. One can also look for the various ‘Current Affairs’ notes floating on the net – many coaching institutes give out some as a ‘demo’ – if you are regular with the newspapers, the content may look familiar. If it does, do not read them further. If you are in Delhi, or have access to Delhi markets, you can get a copy of the latest ‘GS Notes’ in the market. Again, if you have been honest with the news reading, this will also appear familiar. It is not as if the coaching notes have a lot of relevant factoids – but the fact is, this exam is about beating the competition – and if 90% the competition is reading this, it is better to have one look – but only if time permits.

Another skill that needs to be developed is reducing pages of reading into notes of one or two lines during the preparation, and reassembling those one or two lines into pages of answers in the exam. Many people prepare copious amounts of notes, which are as voluminous as, if not even more voluminous than, the source. In my opinion, notes should be handy, and small enough to help one revise one day before the paper. So, any notes that one plans to prepare must be subjected to this constraint – the final document should be readable in one or two days. Now coming to reassembling – one should always remember that the hundreds of days gone into the preparation amount to nothing if the implementation in the three hours of examinations is not upto the mark. As I have said earlier, first answer only what you know, and relegate what you don’t know to the back of your mind. Papers are getting too lengthy for one to afford rumination over some tricky question. Chances are that by the time you are finished with what you know, your subconscious brain would have formed some answers for the other questions too. I have noticed it. It is also important to break answers into points, as far as possible – it is easier to read and understand for the examiner – and also fills the pages faster, if you have less time!

This was my honest to God strategy for everything other than ‘Mechanical Engineering’ in my CSE attempts. Can’t say it would work for you, or anybody else. It did work for me, and it does not cost me anything to put it here. So, here I rest my keyboard, with best wishes for the reader.

Ignorance is bliss?

It is rather creepy to start two articles with the same quote. Einstein has said – “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.” (The quote has been attributed to other scientists too, like Feynman, or Rutherford – doesn’t matter.) The point, this time, is that the so ‘taught’ grandmother is no position replace Einstein (or Feynman / Rutherford) at his job. She is no position to suggest to Einstein (or Feynman/Rutherford) on how to carry on his profession. If the said explanation made any change in the status of the grandmother, it was just that she is now in a position a.) to appreciate what her grandson does, b.)to increase her understanding of the subject even more by reading the more advanced texts, and finally, c.) to actually achieve the status of a critic and a collaborator. However, there is a vast chasm between stage a and stage c – and if the same is not appreciated by the grandmother, it can lead to two simultaneous disasters – a. the grandmother shall get intellectually stunted, and b. the relation between her and grandson will get a lot constrained.

Dumbing down is a part of the technique of teaching. Teaching is normally done on a ‘capacity to know’ basis. Any student of chemistry can recall his progression through the orderly ‘solar system’ model of the atom, to the shell model, the subshell model, finally followed by the totally nebulous advanced models based on abstract mathematics. It’s not as if the advanced models were not known when the more primitive models were being taught to the pupils in the elementary classes. So why were these students taught a model known to be ‘wrong’? The answer lies in the ideas of truth, capacity and the objective. The idea of ‘truth’ is that none of the linearly evolved models is completely wrong or completely accurate. For the purpose of understanding that atoms are the smallest discrete elemental particles, even the elementary ‘currants in the bun’ model of atom (that an atom has some positive parts and some negative electrons) would do well. The idea of ‘capacity’ shows that for a 12 year old, understanding probabilistic ideas of orbitals or ‘electron gas’ might not be easy, whereas he can easily extend the analogy of the Newtonian solar system to electrons encircling the atomic nucleus. The idea of ‘objective’ tells us that we do not expect the 12 year old to use the course knowledge to do cutting edge Nobel prize work in his 13^th year. What we expect of him is to appreciate the facts that there are atoms – having positive nuclei and negative electrons outside the nucleus. If he continues to study Chemistry or Physics – he can build on it the higher concepts in atomic modelling. Even if he does not continue with Chemistry, he shall not go “WTF” when he hears the word ‘electron’, and confuse it for some alien death ray.

However, in teaching by dumbing down, one must always keep in mind to tell the students about the fact that they are being taught the dumbed down version. It is the absence of this caveat that can lead to quite disastrous results – as is evident in the contemporary world. One of the reasons for this happening is the fact that most of our knowledge these days comes not from the traditional sources of knowledge, but through the internet and the media – mainly the electronic media. Both of these media are prone to give out information at a primary level, without the caveat. Internet, as such, has a variety of information – ranging from the most rudimentary ‘how stuff works’ to the most cutting edge research paper.  However, constrained by our prior academic base and short attention span for most average topics, we tend to filter this information in favour of the lower end of the spectrum. As far as the electronic media is considered, dumbed down bite-sized nuggets of information and opinion are their fastest moving products. The result is a burgeoning number of people who think they are well-informed enough on any subject to make decisions without rechecking their facts, and to lock arms with those who have trained and dedicated their lives in the service of the subjects.

One of the rather innocuous results of this phenomenon is the increased reliance of consumers on brands. While a large part of buying ‘brand’ may be associated with the feel good and esteem associated with the possession thereof, a substantial number of decisions to buy on the basis of brands stem from the inability to really ‘separate the wheat from the chaff’. While brand may be the only criteria of judgement for a customer totally ignorant of the product’s features, it is more likely that such totally uninformed customers confine themselves a few products and develop a horse sense about the merit of such products. The half-informed customer, on the other hand, is usually the one who is expanding his purchase horizon. So brand based maneuverers find them as sitting ducks. They just need to string up a few intelligent & technical sounding taglines to their advertisements, to get them (the customers) eating out of their hands, and while they are at it, they will be totally convinced about the virtue or the demerits of any product, based on pseudo-scientific inputs fed to them. People are quicker these days to make a judgement and stick to that, even in face of mounting evidence. As Sir Winston Churchill said – “Occasionally he stumbled over the truth but he always picked himself up and hurried on as if nothing had happened.” Ask them about the reasons for their judgement – and they draw a blank, or concoct false ‘facts’. It might be innocuous when you are choosing your toothpaste, but might mean a big deal when you are choosing your post-graduation! Recently a close person had a lot of heart burn over choosing between a degree in a college which is among the top ‘brands’ in the country, or to go a job that he likes very much, and which also pays well. Asking many ‘experienced’ persons of the society did not help – all said that he should opt for the college – aankh band kar ke (without batting an eyelid). When asked ‘why’ – they said it is a very good college, everybody dreams of joining it. On probing further, it came out that they knew nothing about it – and yet they were prepared to advise in favour of it with the certainty of an expert. Being the closest person with some experience, I was asked for advice many times – all I told him was to find the facts, and form an independent opinion based on it. So he gathered the information – and decided not to join the college. The truth, it seems, has really set him free. Still there are people who tell him he did wrong; and the funny thing, they still are not able to justify their judgement with facts!

Recently, a couple of RadioJockeys were made to face criminal charges because somebody complained thatthey were spreading fear through misinformation. All that the poor guys had done that they had announced that ‘dihydrogen oxide’ was going to pour out of the municipal supply on the date of announcement. It was meant as a harmless prank – the assumption being that after initially freaking out, the listeners would realize what this was about. The dumb listeners went berserk. For those who have not got it – ‘dihydrogen oxide’ or H2O would be - plain water. On a more closer note, around a year back, our local Hindi dailies carried some flyers about some locally manufactured Induction heaters.  Among the USP’s listed out, the one that really made me double with laughter was the fact that it claimed that cooking on induction is better than doing it on gas stove because the food cooked on induction does not give you gas! Are people stupid enough to believe that? I don’t know. Since the advertiser was highlighting this point, he might have had somebody in mind. During my last visit to my native village, I heard one guy was forcing his hapless wife to cook on the wood choolhaa, as he believed that the gas stove food might cause him gas!

Around two months back, we had our attachment in the Parliament of India, as a part of the training. Amongst everything else, we had an interaction with some senior Honourable Parliamentarians of most major parties. It was that time of the year when the functioning of the Houses was being disrupted because of various issues – we ourselves could not get the opportunity to see them functioning. So somebody in the class asked why this was happening. We were expecting the usual answers which come on our TV. However, the sagacious reply of the Hon’ble Member was stunning. He said that the expectations the electorate had from them was totally out of line with their jobs. Parliament is the National legislature – it has the function to make Union Laws, and hold the Union government responsible. However, the majority of the electorate expect them to get their roads built, to get their kids employed somewhere with the government, to do them petty favours. They are happier if the actual Legislation is suspended and the Members are free to attend to their personal issues! This is the state of the awareness about the polity and the distribution of responsibilities under it among our masses. Why shouldn’t it be, when most of us are taught the humanities, at least till Class X, by uninterested teachers, as something which has to be mugged up and disgorged in the examination.

Iconic comedian George Carlin has said - "Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups." The idea is even more important given the fact that a general tendency to attack the established institutions on the basis of half-baked ideas, generally aided by an electronic media bereft both of any restraint or any guilt (about further dumbing down the dumb), has been gaining ground recently. While the administration is generally portrayed as not working, the fact is that it works just as well as any other average organization in the country, for the general good of the greatest – manned by experienced persons, who are not all the bloodsucking leeches they are made out to be. When such pressure groups indulge in petty demagoguery, it often leads to pressures that cause the government to indulge in fire-fighting. This may redistribute the efforts of the government in ways that are not optimal or good for the country in the long run, simply to appease those vested interests that mount such pressures. This can lead to great diseconomies in the efforts of the governments to do things right. Strangely, governance seems to be that one job about which everybody other that the doer seems to know better.

I must say here that I am not against the dumbing down of things, in general – by the textbooks, by the news channels, by anyone. I just wish that it should not be done with a vested interest, and it should be done with a clear disclaimer. It should be done only to spur further interest in the subject matter, and to increase the general awareness of the ideas. After all, nobody can be an expert in all subjects – when scarcely few are experts in their own subjects! However I hope that malicious dumbing down to indoctrinate and brainwash would be fought by those in the know – may be with their own benevolent dumbed down models. These are turbulent times, when the masses long steeped in ignorance are becoming aware, in some measure, and are interacting with the system in the light of this awareness. I hope this is a transient phase, and soon, the new found knowledge would be tempered by an awareness of the limitation of that knowledge. Sir Isaac Newton has described this feeling really succinctly – “I was like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me.” Real knowledge brings with it real humility, real civility. On the back of such knowledge is raised the edifice of a responsible, informed, involved and mature nation.

With Great Power, comes Greater Arrogance?

[Due apologies to Ben Parker, the uncle of Peter 'Spiderman' Parker, whose quote has been mauled for supplying the title of this article. I must also say outright that the word 'Muggle' has been used for 'people who neither are in the bureaucracy, nor have any uncles in the bureaucracy', precisely for the reason that the whole expression might be quite unwieldy, and it is not used in a derogatory manner. Thank you, Jo, for creating such a nice word.]

After around 10 months from the date I left my office in Mumbai, it is time to take up public office once more. Most probably it shall come with some of what has been called, by persons ostensibly more learned, but suspected to be quite innocent of field-craft, “trappings of power”. Nothing too wild – a mode of conveyance, a place of stay, a designation that does not sound dodgy – little things, that have been described by some as ivory towers atop which bureaucrats sit and survey their domains. Yes, our kind has been described as suffering from many ills – venality may be the most highlighted one these days. However, as we have been told by many persons – bureaucrats and muggles alike – it is not the venality that hurts the people interacting with the bureaucracy the most. It is the arrogance. People say they are willing to forgive, or even aid and abet, the venality, if only it would help them avoid the humiliation that they face while interacting with the public service delivery system.

            As it is in my nature, I trace all the ills that riddle the governance structure back to our society at large – this article shall be no different. It is not that the author is oblivious to the arrogance the holders of public offices display. On the other hand, it might give some solace to the humiliated muggles that the bureaucracy reserves the best of its excellent ‘PR skills’ for its own people! What makes it worse is the consciousness which is fuelled by the notions of ‘Grade Pay’ and ‘Warrant of Precedence’. While the outrage of a muggle might stem from the public ‘servant’ dictating terms, it is a whole new level of humiliation when a person you know to be drawing a grade pay at least four steps below you makes you dance to his tunes! So, coming back to the point - our society at large has a proclivity towards arrogant behaviour. My ideas are derived from my interactions within the Northern, Hindi speaking belt; the same may be extrapolated, with caution, by the readers based on their experience. We tend to be arrogant in any relationship where there is a power differential in a transaction. The transaction may be of any nature, and the issue of contention may be of any type – the only common factor is that there exists a transaction, and there exists a power differential between the transacting parties.

One of the most interesting ways in which this arrogance manifests itself is in the arrogance of the ‘ladkeywaaley’ (groom’s side) in the traditional arranged marriage scene. Somehow, in this society, a greater stigma is attached to spinsterhood than is attached to bachelorhood. Combine that with the tradition of most brides being younger than the grooms, and the clock is already running out for the girls as soon as they hit the legal age. This puts an enormous pressure on the girl and her family to get a ‘suitable match’ as soon as the possible, putting them at a disadvantaged status in the arranged marriage market. That it leads to venality is manifest in the practice of dowry. However, venality is not the focus of this article. Arrogance is. The traditional arranged marriage scenario sees the worst kind of arrogant display of this power. The bride’s family is treated as second grade citizens, at least till the period the negotiations, or even the wedding itself, are not complete. The clichéd Hindi cinema meme of the hapless ‘dulhan ka baap’ (bride’s father) taking off his turban and placing it at the feet of the recalcitrant ‘dulhe ka baap’ (groom’s father) has more than a grain of truth.

Another common everyday scenario where our innate arrogance comes to light is in our little economic transactions, especially when it comes to our dealings with the little vendors – the roadside grocer, the street corner cobbler, the emaciated rickshaw puller. We would assume our right to a ‘bargain’, even at the cost of the already slim margins of these entrepreneurs. Many would say they are simply extracting their money’s worth. Think again. The same person would happily drink a 100 buck coffee at CCD, or buy a T-shirt, costing some 200 rupees, at a price range 10 times that. However, when it comes to paying a rickshaw puller Rs.15 instead of the tenner we insist on, we become apoplectic with rage, and start plying them with all the notions of market propriety. It is not that we do it consciously. I myself have gone livid with rage when the Delhi autowallah insist on charging above what has been deemed ‘proper’ (who does not). However, the same feeling of being cheated does not come  up that often when we are transacting with the big people – the lounge-suited owner of an upscale eatery, for that matter.

Popular discourse itself shows traces of societal arrogance. We tend to discount, and deem ourselves superior to, the ‘voting classes’. After all, who hasn’t heard of the story that they sell their votes for liquor and amusement? They constitute a class of which the individuals are powerless compared to the individuals of our class – so how could their judgement on how the nation is to be governed be right? As some people are discovering the ultimate helpless of the ‘once-considered-powerful’ bureaucracy, at least in the arena of verbal dueling, a sense of propriety has given way to arrogance. The ‘civil society’ claims that the public ‘servants’ should behave like ‘servants’, not masters. There is an element of scorn in the utterance of the word ‘servant’. This vision of ‘servants’ is quite different from the Western version of the ‘help’ – the ‘servant’ has to be servile, docile, and able to brook all sorts of abuse. No doubt the government is looking to legislate for the welfare of the actual domestic servants of this very civil society, who, as a whole, have not been very civil to their helps.

Is the situation totally hopeless, and are we doomed to a life devoid of propriety and ‘gentlemanliness’ in our social interactions? Well, we have had individual examples of thorough ladies and gentlemen in our lives. At IIT Delhi, we had the good fortune of having, as our Finance instructor, Professor P.K. Jain, an epitome of right conduct. He addressed all his students, the canteen workers, the helpers, in fact any human being, of whatever age, background or qualification, as ‘Sir’ or ‘Madam’. He never used any ‘street level’ word, even when he had all reasons to do so. Even his admonishments, which were rare, sounded like a well drafted letter! We all would have come across such persons in our life. It is a pity that they are so rare that chancing upon them is such a memorable thing.

It is also a pity that in such an arrogant society, a non-arrogant person who has to deal with a lot of public has to develop a retaliatory ‘instrumental arrogance’. I can tell from the experience of holding office for 10 months that a ‘nice person’ faces a hell out there when faced with people who are confused about their parentage – the “jaante ho mera baap kaun hai” (do you know who my Dad is?) types. If it is not their Dad, it is their uncle, their Aunt, their friend, their student. However, it might be a good idea to shut down this defence mechanism once in a while – and to give the other party a chance to show some innate decency. It is one such incident that prompted me to write this piece, and it is quite illustrative. It so happened that I was traveling with family across the length of my State by a train, which touched the departure station at an hour later than the midnight. When we boarded and reached our berths, we found them occupied with a lot of uniformed men, all armed with INSAS rifles! Now this is the point of panic – government servants, in a huge group, armed, uniformed, and in illegal occupancy of one’s berths at 1 a.m. I was preparing to bring out the whole ‘steel frame’ and stuff – asking them to vacate the berths, tell the name of their commander, their post, their antecedents, and their reasons for being in illegal occupancy of the berths of the family of an officer soaring in pay-grades miles above them! I knew nothing lesser would have worked – given their advantageous position, and I was worried if my affectation of righteously hurt bureaucratic pride would be convincing, given the fact that I was in a 2 day old T-shirt and was carrying a rumpled bag on my shoulder. Fortunately, the showdown never came. Dad requested them to vacate, and they did! All they said was – “Sir, kindly let us wear our shoes, and keep some of our luggage in the vacant holds”. I felt bad for them, in a split interval of a moment. So when they had made their way to a vacant berth at the end of the coach, I started small talk with one of them. I learnt that they were no ordinary ‘chowki’ policemen, but the armed security detail of one of the senior-most Cabinet Ministers of the State which I am about to serve, who was traveling in the First AC coach next to ours. It was good I had not pulled rank in front of them – after all, what is a mere Assistant Collector in front of a Cabinet Minister! One may argue that they were in the wrong in occupying our reserved berths, but the society in the area the train was passing through did not set much store by such laws; and anyway, how was one supposed to enforce those laws there. Yet, despite their immensely powerful position in this transaction, those men chose to be civil. They chose not to be arrogant. They chose to do so with a so called ‘aam aadmi’ (a better heeled one, may be, judging by the fact that he was traveling in Second AC, but an ‘aam aadmi’ nevertheless, since we had not been introduced). It was heartening that this departure from the sad societal norm was done by one of the most vilified segments of the society in this regard – the uniformed forces. The incident redeemed my faith in a better future for our social discourse. Let us bring civility back (if it ever was here to begin with) in our society – avoid the innate arrogance, and let down on the instrumental arrogance, once in a while. We might just usher in a more pleasant world.

The Men Who Ruled India (A Book Review)

[This was a part of my course-work. The book is a very widely read and reviewed one. However, this review received good remarks, from a class of people generally known to criticize. So, I guess, it makes the cut for appearing here.]

Introduction

“The Men who ruled India – the Founders” is a book about the foundation of the British rule in India, and the evolution of the Civil Service in India. It covers the history of India, from the point of view of the British, from the early 17^th Century till the days of the Revolt of 1857.

The credit for this work is accorded to ‘Philip Woodruff’. A quick Google search shows that this is the pseudonym of Philip Mason, an ex-English Civil Servant. Perhaps no other person would be so well qualified to write a book on the Civil Services of the Company Raj – since he is both a British subject and a Civil Servant. The work shows his grasp over both these worlds.

Comparison with similar works

The reviewer happens to have read another book covering the topics of similar nature – ‘Sahibs who loved India’ by Khushwant Singh. There are some similarities between the two works – in the general tone of the chapters, which include rosy eyed reminiscences of the lives of the officers in various civil capacities across India. However, while Singh’s book is a collection of articles by various officers of the I.C.S., Woodruff (Mason)’s book is one complete narrative in itself, and quotations are never too long, and form a part of the narrative. Secondly, Mason’s work does not deal with the I.C.S. technically, but with the H.E.I.C.S. (Honourable East India Company’s Service) 

Run through

The book is divided into three parts – Under the Mughals (1600-1751), The Revolution (1751-1798) and the Golden Age (1798-1858).

The first part comprises roughly of the part when the English were just traders, petitioning for minor favours to the Mughal emperor and his officials. It describes the travails of these pioneers, who undertook risky travel to meet and negotiate with the largely inconsistent Mughal officialdom. In addition to their relations with the Mughals, this part describes their skirmishes with the other European powers – mainly the Portuguese, against whom, with the aid of their superior naval power, they forged some sort of proto military alliance with the Mughal Administration, thus giving them a de facto recognition as a military entity, as against a purely mercantile one. The war with the French is also described, which led to the first significant ‘puppet ruler’ being installed in the shape of the Nawab of Arcot. The development of the three presidency towns is also described. This chapter also describes Company officials like Pitt (who sired a line of British PM’s) and Elihu Yale (the founder of the Yale University) 

The second part deals with the rise of the company to the status of “Revenue Minister” under the nominal suzerainty of the Mughals. The books skips over the details of the ‘Blackhole incident ‘ of Calcutta, the Battles of Plassey and Buxar. However, it is described how, at the end of the latter, the company came to be the Diwan of Bengal – and how they proceeded to carry out this task. Initially they began with an Indian Naib Diwan, who had his own subordinate apparatus to deliver the revenue. However, later, the British took the Revenue Administration in their own hands, and thus the institution of the Collector was born. Two chapters are dedicated to Sir John Shore, under whose Governor-General-ship the revenue administration system developed. This part also contains biographies of noted Civil Servants of the era – such as Harry Verelst, who was the first Collector – of Burdwan. His assumption of his charge can be thought as the start of the Indian Civil Service. His instructions to his subordinates are very similar to what is still taught to revenue officers in India.  One chapter is dedicated to the portrayal of life at a typical British Station.

The third part can be read, more or less, as an extension of the second part. It describes the development of the revenue system, with forms of settlement better than the Zamindari system evolving under Thomas Munro and Boy Malcolm. Also described is the gradual absorption of Central Indian territories and the development of Bombay Presidency under Mountstuart Elphinstone. Other luminaries covered in this part are Charles Metcalfe, John Nicholson, and John Thomason (the founder of IIT Roorkee). The title of the part may be derived from the fact that this part deals with the end of various evils, like Sati, human sacrifice and thugee. A very interesting chapter is devoted to the training of the early Civil Servants – at Fort William College and Haileybury. The penultimate chapter is devoted to the conquest of Punjab and Sindh, in addition to the disastrous attack on Afghanistan. Finally, the book ends with a poignant coverage of the Mutiny, with a surprisingly sympathetic (to the Indians) tone.   

Interesting anecdotes and Revelations.

The book is filled with various interesting anecdotes and revelations – here is a list of some of them. The reader comes to know that Mir Qasim, the ‘puppet’ installed by the British after Buxar, was actually quite an enlightened administrator, and tried hard for the well-being of his subjects, by ending preferential trading rights to the Company. One also learns that the local ruler near Madras agreed to sell to the Company, for some amount, a strip of land equal in width to the range of a random cannon shot! The British brought in the largest cannon in their Presidency to encash this blank cheque. It is interesting to learn that the first large territory that fell into British hands was not won in a conquest, but given as a security by the Nawab of Arkot, for the various loans he needed for his profligate ways. There is also a revelation that for the period of a decade in the late 18^th Century, the position of District Magistrate was separated from the Collector, and given to the District Judge – thus creating the nightmare of any modern day administrator. One cannot help but smile when the author says that while a Rajput widow committing Sati was somehow justified, because his husband was supposed not to return as a loser from a battlefield, a Bengali widow doing it was not appropriate, since his husband was never expected to make a sacrifice! The smile turns to laughter when one reads the way revenue was collected in Oudh – the villagers built mud forts and attacked the revenue collector’s party with cannons – and the negotiations were conducted according to the fortune of both parties in this cannonade! To top it all, it is pleasantly surprising to know that the famous economist Malthus was a Professor of Economics at Haileybury.  The chapter about Haileybury is of special interest to any trainee of the civil Services. It is surprising to note that even at the height of the Victorian Age – which is held synonymous with hypocritical morality, the trainees at Haileybury had a very relaxed and enriching program, while its successor can, at best, be judged as a travesty of it – a cross between a borstal, a boarding school and a scene from ‘Catch-22’.

So different and yet so same

As far as the trials and tribulation of an administrative officer are concerned, there are many instances which show that the issues of those times find a surprisingly strong echo in today’s. It is learnt that, much to his indignation, even Robert Clive had to pay for his initiation arrangements when he joined the Service – much the same way a trainee today has to pay for various ‘compulsory’ and officially needed accoutrements – like laptops, riding gear etc. from his own pocket. Even in those days, there was a debate over the salaries, perks and pelf of the officials. The line – “Independence of outlook does not usually occur without some material security” – sums up the argument most succinctly. There is a clear imprint of modern day pseudo-activists in the episode of Nuncomar, who, when his request for favours were spurned by Warren Hastings, accused him (Hastings) of corrupt practices, based on some real (but bona-fide) mistakes. Many modern officers can recognize this form of blackmail today. Then there is the instance of a confrontation with the Judiciary – as when a writ-happy High Court of Bombay issued a writ of Habeas Corpus to separate a child from his guardian, who had been chosen by the child’s father before his death, and with whom the child was very happy, based on a frivolous complaint. The Collector, in the instance, did not give up, and went on to appeal to the level of the Directors in London, and won! Then, there are frequent instances of distinction between the ‘active’ field officers and the ‘sedentary’ secretariat officers – as is done today. Finally, there is the lament of a man no less than Sir John Shore, that how his life is like that “of a galley slave”, and how he was saddened by the “ingratitude, censure and calumny” heaped on him and his Service brethren, by the populace at large. This is clearly a feeling of a majority of the Civil Servants of modern era, when the public opinion is generally critical of anything done by them.

Writing Style

The book is one complete narrative, from the days of the founding of the Company to the days of the Mutiny. Essentially, the book reads as if it were written in two different ages. That is understandable, since the narrative includes various first person quotations from the protagonist of that moment (in the narrative), which are written in an English some 200 years old, and hence jarring to a modern day reader. The author’s own writing is lucid and simple, and shows elements of wit, which is no surprise, considering his background in the Civil Service. 

Recommendation

The book tells us the story of the colonial period from ‘the other side’. While most people in India might have read the ‘national’ version of the British Raj story, this book gives an interesting counterpoint which must be added to the mix to get a complete picture. The book gives an insider’s view on the way our land revenue system was formed – which, with minor changes, remains the same even today. Thus, it is a very necessary reading for any Revenue Officer. While going through the book, one comes to know about the effort and application of mind put in forming the whole administrative and legal framework of the country, and then one understands why, despite 60 plus years of Independence, we are still unable to find viable ‘swadesi’ alternatives to the same. Most importantly, it shows how a few good men can transform anarchy into stability, peace, and progress, if their hearts are in the right place. For this reason alone, this book is a must read.

On Teaching - In defence of the blackboard, the research and the sincerity

Einstein has said – “You do not really understand something unless you can explain it to your grandmother.” (The quote has been attributed to other scientists too, like Feynman, or Rutherford – doesn’t matter.) The point is, one’s ability to educate another being endowed with supposedly lesser knowledge has been considered the touchstone of one’s own understanding of things. In the past month, yours truly has been educated, has educated, and has been educated about education. So it makes sense to dwell upon the question of teaching, learning and education.

There has been a long debate on whether education is for life or for livelihood. I would say it is for both – but in a prescribed order – livelihood, and then life. For life cannot exist without livelihood, and here livelihood just does not mean qualifying for some job. It is meant in a much broader sense – to be able to make sense of the world around one and to adapt one’s responses so as to enable one to live. It is said that experience is the best teacher. However, the modern human life throws up situations whose responses are not a part of our individual experiences. Ergo, we need to benefit from the collective experience of the humankind – past, and present. This requires that we imbibe the experiences of 108 Billion lifetimes within what we can afford to call our preparatory period. (for that is the number of humans who have ever lived,according to Population Research Bureau – link here) As we can see, at this task, we are disadvantaged by the odds of upto 1 : 10¹¹!! So, we need some mechanism by which we can distil the essence of the human experience in a form which is amenable to be transferred to an average human being within a reasonably short part of his / her lifetime. This mechanism is what the ‘formal education’ system should be.

It is obvious that all this knowledge cannot be taken in as a litany of specific instances. It is not feasible to learn that if an apple is released from above, it will fall; and if a pen is released from above, it will fall. What is needed to be learned that, in general, things released from above will fall. Not everything follows this law – a helium balloon will not fall if released from above – at least not in the troposphere! However, to know that things, when released, do fall, is good enough a fact to help a person survive if put to a situation where he has to choose between walking off a ledge and staying on. My whole point is that any system of education must equip the educated with the generalizations of life. How one arrives at the generalization is the teacher’s prerogative. One may go at it at once – heavier than air things fall when released – so does a ball, so does an apple. Conversely, one may arrive at the generalization via examples – an apple falls, a ball falls, hence any heavier than air object falls.

I know ‘generalization’ is a word in quite bad odour these days with the practitioners of the new fangled pedagogical techniques. One of these techniques, invented half a century back, but gaining currency across disciplines now, is the “Case Study” method. Here, the pupil is given a specific instance – containing various specific facts, and specific happenings. I am not sure what is expected of the poor pupil in this case. Is he to read the story as an interesting plot? Or is he to glean generalizations from a single narrative? The former, though is easy, is entirely futile, as can be seen from our previous discussion – individual narratives hardly suffice as good learning concepts. The latter, on the whole, is very dangerous. One of the jokes, which is often bandied about as a cautionary tale against generalization by the proponents of case approach, goes as follows –

“It is time to elect a new world leader, and only your vote counts. Here are the facts about the three candidates.

Candidate A.

Associates with crooked politicians, and consults with an astrologist. He's  had two mistresses.   He also chain smokes and drinks 8 to 10 martinis a day.

Candidate B.

He was kicked out of office twice, sleeps until noon, used opium in college and drinks a quart of whiskey every evening.

Candidate C.

He is a decorated war hero. He's a vegetarian, doesn't smoke, only drinks an occasional beer and never cheated on his wife.

 Which of these candidates would be your choice? Decide first ... no peeking, then scroll down for the response.

Candidate A is Franklin D. Roosevelt.
Candidate B is Winston  Churchill.
Candidate C is Adolph Hitler.”

While that may serve as a warning that generalization may lead to an Adolf Hitler rising to the top at the expense of more worthy candidates like Churchill and Roosevelt, what is the positive takeaway the reader may get from this narrative? Absolutely nothing. Thus, I conclude my argument that teaching through cases is, at best, a very slow and tiresome way of leading to what could be easily accomplished in 10 minutes of a direct blackboard lecture, and, at worst, a scheming brainwashing of impressionable minds.

Another variety of these new ideas is the ‘do-it-yourself’ school of thought. Yours truly has had the misfortune of facing this pedagogical weapon during the painful years of his pursuit of his MBA degree. Most teachers never stood up to the blackboard – either they circulated a printed copy of some ‘case’ to read and understand whatever one wanted to, or they gave us a topic to prepare a powerpoint presentation on. While the former led to no learning at all, the latter led to slow and torturous progress, and at the same time, rendered the teachers redundant in our eyes – well, if we were so good at learning, why do we need to pay for someone to sit at the back of the class and ruminate (in the bovine sense)!

Coming back to the quote at the beginning – all my teachers, whom I consider good, had three things in common – a. an excellent command over the subject they were supposed to be teaching, b. readiness to roll up the sleeves at the blackboard and to slog it out the old fashioned way, step by step, instead of using the smokescreen of jargon, when met with a query and c. a tendency to be in the front of the class, almost never at the back, except at evaluation time. When yours truly stepped up for the job of teaching a couple of classes, one followed their lead – teaching basic English grammar to beginners does not require much background, but still, half an hour on the internet cleared the cobwebs that had settled on the concepts of ‘classification of nouns’ and ‘declensions of verbs’. Then, at the stage of execution, one held the fort in front of the board. Examples were used to build concepts, and then the concepts were defined and written down, followed by test examples to apply these written rules. Regular feedback was taken, and all the lags were corrected on the spot. In the end, it was a real joy to notice that one was able to make them string along grammatically correct translations in English of simple Hindi sentences – with the aid of the notes on the basic “how-to-do’s” given by me. For that was what they had come expecting from me, and I was able to fulfil my duty.

Finally, I must come to the subject of teaching values – clamour for which has started to crescendo in the aftermath of some really ghastly crimes of the recent times. That we have a need to teach values is a truth. However, values cannot be taught the way science and mathematics are taught. Of course, law can be taught in that way, to some extent, as a list of do’s and dont’s. That may lead to some improvement in the social behaviour, purely because of the threat of various penal provisions. Of course, that is how values are being taught these days – as a checklist of pieties. That, perhaps, in conjunction with the subject of the previous paragraphs, is the greatest tragedy of today’s education system – what needs to be taught by example is being taught as dogmatic fact, and what needs to be taught as fact is being taught by nebulous examples. Values are best learned when we see our role models behave in the society. For most of us, these role models are either parents or teachers. Parental behaviour is often governed by the socioeconomic strata they come from, and the whole purpose of value education is to steer the offsprings from this behaviour endemic to certain unfortunate circumstances to more socially acceptable thoughts and behaviour. Here, the role of the teacher’s behaviour and the learning environment is even more important – it has to first cause unlearning, and then, perhaps, new learning. Here comes the second biggest tragedy of today’s educational scenario – there is a huge chasm between the values that are attempted to be taught, and the values that are on display in the workings of the teacher and the whole educational system. You cannot teach liberal principles when all your system is steeped in orthodoxy. You cannot teach honesty when your system itself is a vulgar display of venality. You cannot teach independence of thought when sycophancy is the way things are done around the place. While the concurrence of letter and spirit is a requirement in all places, nowhere is it more important than in a place of learning and training. In absence of such oneness, hypocrisy is quite easy to learn; even the most incompetent and insincere teachers can teach it by example!

The headlines are all gloomy these days, and sometimes it may appear that all is going to the dogs. A hard steering is needed. The judicial-correctional system is reeling under the pressure of reforming deviants by their millions, but what really is needed is an improvement in the inflow to the population, through better training of minds. The nation cannot improve without an improvement in the educational & training system –for straight nails cannot be forged on a crooked anvil.