A few days ago, I was listening to the ever entertaining Mani Shankar Aiyer on being a Stephanian. He had, at some earlier date, spoken disparagingly about Hans Raj college and Ajay Maken. The fact is, the alumni of certain colleges do have this sense of superiority.
Now specially with the cutoffs for Stephens being what it is, perhaps this is more so. I have seen it in the few Stephanians I knew years ago. It's due I think, to the general perception, the long history, the record of its alumni.....many things. It's a cultural superiority that they feel ("You see, in the Brothers Karamazov Dostoyevsky deals with the existential questions in a different manner than he does in Crime and Punishment" and the "you" in question goes "Duh")
Does this sense of superiority translate directly into achievement? I don't know. The achievers from St Stephens may have attained the same heights even if they had gone to Hans Raj. Who is to say they wouldn't have?
By Mani Shankar's own admission, it didn't amount to much in his own case.
3 comments:
It is neither. Some people do not do anything to further the interest of the society and dedicate their life to the cause of a few individuals' welfare. These few individuals provide the required money, power and position to satisfy the ego of these people. We should create a system whereby individuals are judged on the basis of their performance but not on the basis of the caps they wear, the designation they have or the people they are closer to. They start feeling that they are important because they are not judged this way and they shoot off their mouth very frequently. The media is their to add to their false stature as superior beings.
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/10/10/051010crat_atlarge
@m: very interesting link.
Post a Comment