Peacock

A Hindi saying goes “jungle main mor nacha, kisne dekha” which literally translates to “who sees the peacock dance in the jungle?”. Allegorically it means that a thing of beauty, or rather anything worthwhile requires a witness. On a broader level, is the worth of anything dependent on attestation? Can something not stand on its merit without being recognised.

I am not sure of the answer.

Everything around me tells me that nothing has any meaning without an audience. It is almost to say that a thing cannot exist in isolation. There is some merit in seeking validation to an achievement. It is not only about inviting appreciation, but also feedback or criticism. This feedback may give a better perspective rather than basking in self-glory. Also, man’s sociability cannot be wished away in the cloak of individuality. Most of our thoughts, emotions, habits, actions, behaviour are a product of being part of a social group. In isolation, a man is both God, and demon. Also appreciation is the most basic of human needs. Man has agreed to a social construct, and this agreement entails a cost. In return man seeks support, and esteem.

But, things seem to be getting out of hand. The hunger for validation has been expanding rapidly. One ready tool to measure this validation is the social media, or the ‘Like’, ‘Share’, ‘Follow’, options. These are today’s currencies, without which most things seem worthless. An achievement does not stand without these. Validation, peer appreciation is instantly sought and is the only form of closure to most things. I heard this statement for a fellow runner in last year’s half marathon “This is not a race for coming first or for any rank, this is more a race with oneself”. Excellently put I say. But I am almost sure that that guy would have felt incomplete even after completing the race, till he had shared message of his success on social media. I hate it when people engage in an activity only to get a picture taken at the end of it and feel absolutely distraught when that evidence is somehow lost.

While one can argue about the degree or the extent of degradation today, I revert to the basic conundrum: is it sufficient to derive  happiness or satisfaction from self-validation, of doing something just for self? Idealistically I would like that to be the case. When a person feels complete in doing, caring not for acclaim. I know it can sound hollow, impractical, even narcissistic. Yet I feel there is an innate beauty in doing something without the expectation of acknowledgement. It can be the purest intention of doing something.  

The quote at the beginning of this piece was targeted at me with regard to the blog, with the insistence that I advertise my blog more. I maintain that I write for myself, to give expressions to the thoughts which keep whirling in my mind. Thus there is a therapeutic reason for writing. One may ask - so why put it on a blog? That is to give it a finality, to impose a deadline on oneself. Without it, the writing may become endless. While the thoughts are still incomplete in many cases, by blogging I hope to assign some linearity to the inherent circularity of my thoughts. Still the argument remains that what is the value of my blog if nobody reads it, a lone trumpet. What all I may argue, even I am not sure! Many a times, I do yearn for feedback, even appreciation for what I have written.

Is there a shift in the work - reward - satisfaction equation in today’s generation. People are too result-oriented, and tangibility-seeking. My first few years in my current organisation were the best for me, because they perfectly embodied the ethos of ‘keeping the head down and working’. The idea behind keeping the head down is to not know if and who is observing. It is about doing something for the joy of doing it. Henry Ford said: “quality means doing it right when no one is looking”. I know he meant it largely from the perspective of instilling discipline on the factory shop floor. But it can be extended to mean that excellence does not necessarily mean an audience. Excellence or for that matter any task can be for oneself. This is the message that is getting lost in today’s times.

Abhinav Bindra, India’s only individual Olympic gold medalist was coached by a German couple - Heinz Reinkemeier and Gaby Buhlmann. There is an iconic image just after Bindra fired his gold-winning shot at 2008 Beijing Olympics - a profile pose where he is looking triumphantly at a fuzzy-haired woman who is in turn giving him a thumbs-up. She is Gaby. Since then, Heinz and Gaby have not got the adulation they deserved for being instrumental in training Bindra. An Indian Express article beautifully captures their little-acknowledged contribution to Indian sports. Amazingly, the couple could not care less. Heinz is quoted a saying: “Award? I’ll accept only if it is given by a royal.” and “There are so many medallists from here (his academy), we will forever be attending award functions if that begins to happen”. Talk about being comfortable doing your thing without a care.

History gives us plenty of examples where people did not get the due for their contributions to the mankind. Of course these are the examples which have managed to sneak through the cracks of time, the actual unknowns are not known. Alfred Russel Wallace is a well known naturalist. But very few people know that he independently conceived the theory of evolution through natural selection and his paper on the subject was jointly published with some of the writings of Charles Darwin, the man who is widely credited and seen as the father of evolution theory. Giving more evidence would only contradict my point - something can have worth even in anonymity.

I would like to quote from the animation movie Ratatouille. The comment comes from a stern, arrogant, and highly influential food critic (named Ego), the kind who has power to make or destroy reputations. He is about to review the restaurant where the central character is the chef. Situation is dire and the future of the restaurant depends on Ego’s review of the food that he is being served. His review the next day is one of my favourite movie dialogues: “In many ways the work of a critic is easy. We risk very little, yet enjoy a position over those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgement. … But, the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so“. The power of an act, just the act, irrespective of what precedes it or succeeds it.  

Who knows if a peacock’s dance, like a butterfly’s flutter, may cause a tornado somewhere. No worries, even if it does not!