HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Subject: Re: Serving The Society
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 00:19:52 GMT

==============================
 nair@quintus.com (Anil Nair) writes:
>
>To indulge in a more constructive exchange: The problem I find is that 
>Hinduism is entrenched as a way of life into Indian culture way too 
>deep. Its affects can be seen at various layers.
>And all the interesting stuff that it has
>(to me) is very often mired in a morass of superficialities.
>In its fundamentals, all that it is, is a set of axioms to understand the
>universe in a consistent framework. 
>

 If the consequences of a philosophy are "morass of superficialities,"
 then isn't there something inconsistent with the premises, the axioms of
 that philosophy? Isn't something somewhere wrong fundamentally?
 
 Even here, in what you prefer to differentiate as "western world," (for me
 this is earth, we are all doing experiments) many philosophies of life have
 greeted civilizations. The most recent one with "morass of superficialities"
 was communism. We all have lived thru its evolution and history. 
 And do I need to explain what was wrong with the axioms of communism?

 So, what is the cause of the "morass of superficialities" that 
 hinduism has resulted into. Why is the Indian way of life so entrenched
 by it? And what do you suggest can help remove this "morass?"

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
ps: I don't believe in serving the society, I think each individual should
    serve the best within himself/herself. And destine his or her own 
    destiny; excel unto himself/herself. And enjoy the process. And not
    forget to smell the roses. And take it easy if thorns pinch while all
    you wanted was to smell the rose. I am different, I know.
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: smehta@kwela.nynexst.Com (Sandeep Mehta)
Subject: Re: More Literature Debate
Followup-To: Lit. Request
Reply-To: smehta@nynexst.com
Organization: Speech Technology, AI Lab, NYNEX S&T Inc, White Plains, NY
Date: 21 Jul 92 17:52:29


> bjag@nwu.edu (Bharathi Jagadeesh) writes:

> > pghol@ctp.com (Preeti Gholap)

> > I would be concerned about her alleged claim if her work
> > exoticised or otherwise misrepresented her subjects - but I dont
> > see that it does.  I would be interested in hearing from
> > American-Indian women, in particular, just how her work does this.

> One of the most important is that i'm comfortable reading fiction
> that has no real relevance to me (for example, growing up in a
> Scottish farm), but if it's about something that I might know
> about, then, all of a sudden, I get very demanding about accuracy.
> And accuracy is a complicated thing. Mukherjee might reflect what
> it's like for her, being an Indian-American woman, but she might
> not succeed in reflecting my experience.

Ummm, I sense a strange contradiction here. To me, the purpose of
*fiction* -- at least not its primary purpose -- is *not* to be
accurate or truthful but to be imaginative and inventive. If
imaginative and inventive tales get woven at the expense of bending
or even subverting the truth (which to me is synonymous with
accuracy) so be it. If beauty is thus achieved it doesn't imply the
literary creation is good let alone true. To pull out yet another
fave quote of mine :) :

	"Imagination is the one weapon in the war against reality."
		-- Jules de Gaultier

More importantly, the imposition of accuracy can be more damaging to
the ethnic-immigrant writer who like the rest the populace is clawing
up her totem pole.

Having said all that, I concur with you that one need not appreciate
fiction -- even good fiction -- if it doesn't relate to one's own
experiences.

p.s. I don't think Bharat[h]i Mukherjee is Indian-American in the
true sense of the word. I believe, and I might be wrong, that she
grew up, to a large extent, in India.

/sandeep
--
smehta@nynexst.com
--
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs."
	-- Edgard Varese
From: ravi@hpldsla.sid.hp.com (Ravi Naik)
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:40:27 GMT
Subject: Ventriloquism Show - Ramdas Padhye
Organization: HP Scientific Instruments Division - Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian


                        Maharashtra Mandal - Bay Area

                                Presents

                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                     Morning Doordarshan "Jee Sahab" fame

                          Renowed  Ventriloquist

                        R A M D A S    P A D H Y E
                                 And His
                        T A L K I N G    D O L L S

                ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

                        Venue:
                                Los Altos Youth Centre
                                No. 1, San Antonio Road,
                                Los Altos, CA - 94022

                        Date:
                                Saturday, 25th July, 1992
                        Time:
                                3  P.M.

                        Tickets:
                                $3.00  for members
                                $8.00  for non-members

=============================================================================
    Note:
        Mr. Ramdas Padhye will be presenting part of his programme
        in English, especially for children, on relevant topics.
=============================================================================

    For Information Contact:
        Shyam Uttarwar      (408)241-8544
        Sameer Prabhavalwar (408)629-1877
        Ravindra Naik       (415)948-4994

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
			Name   :  Ravindra Naik
			Email  :  ravi@hpldsl7.sid.hp.com
			Phone  :  (415)857-4521 (W)
			Phone  :  (415)948-4994 (R)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Xref: sparky alt.culture.us.asian-indian:330 soc.culture.asian.american:7314
From: sahai@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Anant Sahai)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.asian.american
Subject: Re: Science and Technology (Re: Family values ...)
Date: 30 Jul 92 16:23:53 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley

In article <1992Jul30.013527.23929@news2.cis.umn.edu> shiv@tsp.med.umn.edu (Shiv Prasad) writes:
>In article <1992Jul29.184020.17893@Firewall.Nielsen.Com> mgundeko@pcserver2.Naitc.Com (Murthy Gundekota) writes:
>>affected. In that sense, family values are nothing but a set of
>>agreements about family units for the survival of the species. And
>>science is not a villain but a way of life that guarantees our
>>survival.  The question is: where do these seemingly two different
>>fronts come together? Religion, of course.
>>
>>
>>Murthy
>
>Science and family values come together at religion?  Please explain.
>The so-called "family values" of taday seem based in religion.  Religion,
>or at least organized religion, frowns upon the inquisitive nature of 
>science (remember the shroud of Turin?)  The religious powers seek to
>preserve the status quo, and hence their own influence over their congre-
>gations.  They eschew those who aren't satisfied by the "because the 
>Bible/Koran/Gita/etc says so."  I agree that society's values lag behind
>technology, but how exactly does religion bridge the gap.
>If the religion-glue statement was facetious, the ignore my rantings.
>
>Shiv
>

I must disagree with Shiv's statement that Religion (I can only speak
for the Eastern Traditions here. I don't know enough about
Christianity or Islam (Although I seem to recall that the coming of Islam
actually ushered in a Golden Age for Science in Arabia)) frowns upon
"inquisitive" thinking. In fact, it seems to me that it positively
encourages it. Remember the words of the Buddha at the time of his
death, I believe he said (In Pali probably :) "seek out your own
salvation with dilligence."  Religion, like Science, is not in the
business of providing people with set answers. Rather, it gives people
METHODS by which they can achieve self-realization. The Vedas and
Upanishads themselves state that the study of the Vedas and Upanishads
is secondary in importance to personal practice and discovery. The
major difference between Science and Religion is their area of
emphasis: Religion emphasis the inner world, while Science emphasises
the outer one. They are both about discovery.

Anant
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Superior?
Date: 25 Jul 92 16:51:15 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

==============================
 hira@cme.nist.gov writes:
>A friend of mine, asian american female, heard these comments from whites
>who thought that they were superior dating partners. I thought that it might 
>be interesting to the rest of y'all, particularly with the thread of dating.
>----x-----  
>These are only the negative comments.  So I'm not saying that ALL people
>think this way, or that ALL people in White/Asian relationships are based on
>the "savior" concept.  In fact I would hazard to say that most people
>in committed White/Asian relationships are not based on this concept 
>because otherwise the relationship would not have lasted. 
>Give us Asian women some credit.  The
>guys who come up with those lines get the big boot in the backside.
>Just to make it fair.  I have met numerous white men and women who do not
>subscribe to these concepts of white being better.  In fact some are
>indignant that others would categorize them as thinking so.
>----------------------------End of her
>Comments--------------------------------------
>
>Just food for thought.

 Personally, I find that individuals subscribing to such believes have
 tough time getting into relationships and keeping them long - even if
 the partner is of the same background.

 A relationship may begin with emotions. It may even begin with commonality
 of prejudice. But such relationships end. Soon. For relationships can
 never feed on hatred or ignorance. Relationships may be sustained with
 compromises. But then, sustenance is no fun. Relationships thrive on 
 values, goals, integrity, strengths....

 If it ain't working - move, migrate, explore elsewhere.

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: smehta@kwela.nynexst.Com (Sandeep Mehta)
Subject: Re: And more Lit...
Reply-To: smehta@nynexst.com
Organization: Speech Technology, AI Lab, NYNEX S&T Inc, White Plains, NY
Date: 23 Jul 92 13:07:54


> pghol@ctp.com (Preeti Gholap) writes:

> Rohinton Mistry is a Canadian-Indian writer (he emigrated in 1975)
> and a member of the Parsi community. There are, incidentally a
> large number of Canadian Parsee's, who mostly live in suburban
> Toronto.

Talking of Parsi authors, on a friend's recommendation, I picked up
BOMBAY DUCK by Faroukh Dhondy (sp?). He is an Indian author and that
sounds like a Parsi name but I'm not sure. Anyone know about him? The
book is pretty low on my reading stack so...

Oh, and talking of hilarious, has anyone read Upamanyu Chatterjee's
ENGLISH AUGUST? Chatterjee is/was a bored IAS officer w/ a degree (in
English?) from Yale. The book is an irreverent and scatological look
at life in limbo in small town India. Don't read it in one sitting --
you'll get bored -- but otherwise it is a bundle of laughs. Goes well
w/ the "lighten up guys!" theme ;-#

/sandeep
--
smehta@nynexst.com
--
"An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind theirs."
	-- Edgard Varese
From: bjag@nwu.edu (Bharathi Jagadeesh)
Subject: Re: More Literature Debate
Followup-To: Lit. Request
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 19:02:17 GMT

In article <1992Jul20.150739.15792@ctp.com>, pghol@ctp.com (Preeti Gholap)
wrote:
> 
> My apologies if this got posted twice...
> 
> <kpatel@cory.Berkeley.EDU> writes:
> > Bharati Mukherjee has mistakenly claimed to speak for the
> >south-asian-american... 

Well, I've always been wary of reading any of her work since she misspells
my name! 8-). I'm afraid I've gotten used to being the only Bharathi
around, and when I see her name on a book I'm always horribly offended that
someone else became famous with _my_ name 8-). Thankfully, she's  not a
scientist. (I know that Bharati is a perfectly valid spelling of the name,
and that it's a perfectly common name but I've become selfish about my
name, living in the US.)

> I would be concerned
> about her alleged claim if her work exoticised or otherwise
> misrepresented her subjects - but I dont see that it does. 
> I would be interested in hearing from American-Indian
> women, in particular, just how her work does this. 

After giving my foolish reasons for not reading her books I should give
some of the real ones. One of the most important is that i'm comfortable
reading fiction that has no real relevance to me (for example, growing up
in a Scottish farm), but if it's about something that I might know about,
then, all of a sudden, I get very demanding about accuracy. And accuracy is
a complicated thing. Mukherjee might reflect what it's like for her, being
an Indian-American woman, but she might not succeed in reflecting my
experience. And when her experience disagrees with mine, I'll feel
offended, even though she has a perfect right to talk about what she feels.


Maybe I'll try some of her books and see if I still feel this, given that
plenty of people seem to be recommending her books. 
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: vganesan@reed.edu (The Phoenix)
Subject: Re: Desi friends
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 07:09:26 GMT

In article <1992Jul28.010616.2820@tamsun.tamu.edu> gagrawal@cs.tamu.edu (Gopal Agrawal) writes:
>>In article <1992Jul21.140936.5716@iscsvax.uni.edu>,
>>shangari9701@iscsvax.uni.edu wrote:

>arranged marriages have been less successful than love marriages 
>or vice versa. (As a reminder, 50% of the marriages in US end up 
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>in divorce with the kids bearing the brunt of it all). 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

You know statistics like that convey nothing. To me I define marriage
has a relation in which two people who find themselves mutually
compatible decide to share some *parts* of their life with each
other, as soon as any of that initial compatibility or inclination
to share by any one of the two involved declines, then they are
divorced. This is just my view, societal norms and codes may have
different views. So statistics  like what you are quoting don't say
much. To borrow a quote from the book "May you be the mother of hundred
sons", asked why she loves her husband, a tribal woman replies, "He 
doesn't beat me, thats why". With marriages in that state, our statistics
are meaningless

Peace 

The Phoenix



-- 
  The Greatest burden in the world is to have              The Phoenix
   a great potential.                                      Reed #252
                     Linus from "Peanuts"                  Reed College
                                                         Portland, OR-97202
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
From: qureshi@bnr.ca (Emran Qureshi)
Subject: Re: Boy proposes, Girls' brother disposes
Reply-To: qureshi@bnr.ca (Emran Qureshi)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 92 19:16:28 GMT

In article <17320@autodesk.COM>, sundar@Autodesk.COM (Sundar Krishnamurthy) writes:
|> Have you ever been to India?! Imagine some guy on the street writing
|> a letter to your hypothetical (or real), pretty (hypothetical/real)
|> sister? I can see you and the rest of the family loading up the
|> ancestral bazookah to nuke this guy! Come on! It is a natural gut
|> reaction. Just because they are in US and they threatened your
|> friend it doesn't alter our basic tendency to overblow something
|> like this. But then again, think of all the women who get stalked
|> but psychopaths waiting to rape and/or kill them someday...Welcome
|> to the 90s.
|> 
|> It doesn't matter where they are born. Get out of this ABCD-means-
|> dumb knee-jerk reaction. People are pretty much the same. Actually,
|> it is you who would like that girl to "meet/flirt" with your friend,
|> the very actions which are regarded Western and therefore, decadent!
|> 
|> Sundar
|> 

Huh?
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.asian.american
From: mgundeko@pcserver2.Naitc.Com (Murthy Gundekota)
Subject: Re: Science and Technology
Organization: Somewhere near Chicago
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 18:21:30 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.203403.26256@menudo.uh.edu> mece1xg@menudo.uh.edu (purna) writes: 
>howdy!
>first, i'd like to say hi to all you people that may or may not remember
>me. 

Another Texan! Welcome aboard!! Just curious, what is applied alchemy?

>for example, the same knowledge
>that can blow up the entire world (nuclear bomb) also reheats mom's
>cooking in the microwave oven!

There is no radio-active substance in the microwave. Unless your
mom is a radiologist or physicist :-)

>it changes our perceptions of what our world is.  for example, the
>world was considered to be the center of the universe (by most major
 ^^^^^

You mean earth.

>because of "science". there are
>a number of other ways to try and attain these "truths" including
>religion, philosophy, etc.  each of these, in turn, will ALSO shake
>up the conventional wisdom in our society.

Very well said. I don't see how religion can shake up anything, in the
sense of revolution, in these days.  The shake ups have already taken
place. Like the crusades. Although, religious chauvinism continues to
plague people around. Heard recently that the Italian and Japanese
translators of Rushdie's Satanic Verses were killed! The Rushdie
affair, coming from Khomeini's fatah, an Islamic condemnation, has
tested the freedom of speech precept in several countries. Believe it
or not, many democratic and free countries have failed that test.

>music has ALWAYS affected
>society and many types question those "traditional family values", like
>rock-n-roll did during the 50's, 60's and 70's, or rap does in the 80's
>and 90's (in the u.s.a.)!  there again, it's not science that's causing
>the changes. 

Unless of course there is a mutant parent club that is trying to
find a gene mapping for bad afflictions :-) I don't see how rap as a
musical form defies family values. It is an artistic expression, even
if we compared it unfairly with lurid poetry and art. However, it
matters to some families how rap is packaged and presented to their
kids. The gut reaction is similar if pornography were to be sent in
with junk mail.

>what i guess i'm trying to point out is that each has its place, science,
>technology, religion, history, etc. and each of these can change
>many of our traditional values.  just as s&t change our values, so do
>music, art, philosophy, religion, etc.  singling out s&t as carrying
>the brunt of this battle is an error of omission.

By generalizing the sources of input to family values, you have lost
sight of the one key thing: whatever the input is, it has to be
rational and objective.  If history passes that test, let it be the
basis. Indeed they say history repeats itself. And it depends on how
well history is documented.

>one last thing.  as for religion being the blending of the 2 different
>fronts that you put forth, well.....i won't agree. 

The little piece of tongue that I've ingested is still somewhere
in my stomach (I bit my tongue yesterday on this note ;-) 

>-purna


Murthy
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian
Subject: Glass ceilings ( Re: Lighten up people!)
Date: 25 Jul 92 16:28:52 GMT
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology

=====================
 mvij@novell.com (Manish Vij) writes:
>
>Good point!  Many of the immigrants I know espouse their belief in
>the American dream -- the land of wide-open opportunity where anyone
>can be anything s/he wants to be, if s/he wishes -- more stridently
>than those who have been here awhile.  They don't see, or wish to acknowledge,
>the barriers to advancement which make this society less than a level
>playing field.  I don't wish to imply that America is horribly unfair
>compared to the rest of the world; on the contrary, it is relatively
>a freer society in terms of opportunity for socioeconomic advancement.
>However, it would be a mistake to ignore the very real glass ceilings,
>racism, and discrimination in this society.

 No playing ground is ever level. Except those on conceptual 
 drawing boards. 

 This society, like every other society on this planet has its own
 shadows and images of glass ceilings. 

 Prejudices and biases are, but, natural to every human. We choose
 our mates by some arbitrary personal standards - standards that are
 so real and important to us, while being trivial to others. Things
 like "I am not comfortable with her;" "She is religious, I am not;"
 "She is from a different culture;"..... Well job opportunities and
 responsibilities are like "she." And, such arbitrary standards may be
 important to some employer. Such prejudices are not Right. Such
 prejudices are not Just. But then it ain't right that this planet is 
 not twice as big as it is now - would solve lot of problems. Reality.
 Facts. They exist. Whether it is true or not true; whether it is right
 or not right - well that is not the question. Nor is it the real problem.

 The problem as I see is somewhere else. It is in expecting rest of
 the world to subscribe to your personal standards. If you are great
 and extremely competent - then a company with glass ceiling is loosing 
 your abilities. You are not actualizing your abilities. Should you stay
 with this company? If you do, then it is your choice.

 The ultimate solution to this problem is in creating your own playing
 field. Be on the other side of glass ceiling. And make sure, then, that
 you don't put glass ceilings based on prejudices like sex, race, culture...

 The greatness of America is in letting you create your own playing
 fields. And when odds are against you, you can't win by being marginally
 better. You have to be exceptionally better. And start in your garage.

 Well, some do it. 

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.asian.american
From: tyadav@athena.mit.edu (Tapesh Yadav)
Subject: Re: Family values and the West.
Keywords: Marriage, Family, Industrial, West.
Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 1992 20:38:20 GMT

=====================================
 sgs1679@usl.edu (Sudhindranath Sira G) writes:
>
>Ironically, we find even the West hankering after "family-values"
>these days.  Most technologies current in the West are deleterious for 
>maintaining the family values.  Maintaining family values in such a 
>society is virtually impossible. So long as the activities of
>the Western societies are market-oriented rather than family-oriented,
>there is no cure for their ills.
>

 This market vs. family dichotomy doesn't make sense.
 First of, the family is a major sector of the market. 

 Secondly, market orientation in today's management 
 schools has come to mean "know your customer. what does
 he/she value?" This is synonymous with "treating customers like 
 your family members." So there isn't any real dichotomy there.

 Third, Japan has one of the most preserved sense of family values.
 And technologically, they are one of the tops. And note the market
 orientation sense they have. Extraordinary.

 Fourth, technology is just a means. The ends are human values/ambitions.
 How technology is used has/will depend on what we humans want and value.

 Finally, the real orientation of societies/individuals is not 
 towards markets, families, etc. The orientation is towards happiness
 and how can happiness be achieved. 

 Loss of family values does not imply loss of individual values.

 What ills?

T.Y.
----
tyadav@athena.mit.edu
Newsgroups: alt.culture.us.asian-indian,soc.culture.asian.american