Music
Mood:  lyrical

What Music Means To Me

Well, one can go on and on about how music is divine, a means to tune in to the consciousness within or to establish communion with one’s inner being, to listen to the harmony of the spheres, to experience calm and bliss, to enjoy with like minded friends, to converse with the great masters of yore, to establish a rhythm of life, to express one’s creativity and give vent to one’s artistic urges. And one would not be far from some profound truths if one does.

My concerns are somewhat more mundane here.

For me, music arouses a myriad of memories. Some of the most tender, and most fulfilling. Besides being important landmarks in whatever little variety that adorns my musical life. I shall list here two formative, defining, influences. One is of my father, the second of my guru. To tune in to them, to actualize the nuances of their performance and reaffirm their ideas about music is the greatest activity that I can possibly perform. And the most fulfilling. That, in essence, is what music means to me.

Here, I shall talk of the first influence.

The First Influence, Father

My earliest memories of music are of my father’s singing. A maverick of sorts, a man of modest means, who would go out of his way to help others, who enjoyed the good life but had a peculiar contempt for the obsession with money and wealth he found around him. He would get into a mood and sing in his rich baritone voice for hours on end, to no one in particular. He was a great fan of the legendary K.L. Sehgal, and contemporaries Pankaj Mullick and K.C. Dey, and a great appreciator of Talat Mehmood, and later on of M. Rafi too. He was one who voiced his opinion in the 60s that he preferred Asha Bhonsale’s voice to Lataji’s because he found her more versatile. This, at a time when Lataji ruled the musical world, and the only person who ever gave a chance to Ashaji to sing was the great O.P.Nayyar. He enjoyed singing new numbers of Ashaji in his rich baritone, almost like Sehgal singing Ashaji’s songs. And while we smiled and felt embarrassed, he carried on regardless. The voice still rings in my ear, the song of a man who sang from the heart, whose voice emoted every word that escaped his lips.

He also had a great sense of poetry. He went to great lengths to explain the subtleties and nuances of the lyrics of a song, and got into the skin of the poet to understand what the poetry conveyed. The first poetry he taught me was a lovely poem by the great English poet Henry Longfellow, which I have by heart:

Lives of great men all remind us
We can make our lives sublime
And departing, leave behind us
Footprints on the sands of time.

Footprints that perhaps another
Sailing o’er life’s solemn main
A forlorn, or ship wrecked brother
Seeing, shall take heart again.

He explained the meaning of the lovely metaphor, ‘Footprints on the sands of time’. He explained what ‘o’er’ meant, that it was a poet’s license for the word ‘over’, so as to help in the recitation. What the word ‘main’ meant (it means the sea). How can life be a ‘solemn main’ for some. Why the ‘forlorn or ship wrecked brother’ sentence. How, when the footprints on the sands are seen, it gives courage to the despondent to take heart and carry on without losing hope. And how, finally, and this was the most important lesson he taught, we should all try to lead our life so that we leave our impress, howsoever small, ‘on the sands of time’.

To the tiny, impressionable mind, it was an ennobling experience to hear him expound so effortlessly on the meaning of the poetry. He did not have to persuade me very hard to learn it by heart. Having understood its profound meaning, I was myself motivated to learn it.

The incident that follows is noteworthy. I must be in the VII or VIII standard. Once the teacher had not come for her class. One of the office staff, a learned senior who had a very good handwriting, came to engage the class. He asked the students to come to the black board and write anything, in the best hand possible. The usual hesitation amongst students was noticeable. Friends egged me on. I just went to the black board, took the chalk piece, and wrote out Longfellow’s poetry quoted above. Just like that. The class gaped in wonder, but what I still remember is the open mouthed look of wonder and awe on the wise man’s face. He was nonplussed. Gathering his wits, he asked almost in a whisper, ‘Who taught you this?’ And I was proud to say, ‘My father, sir.’ The look of admiration on his face for the man who could teach such a lovely poetry to his son at so tender an age, a poetry not in any syllabus and not for any exam but just for the love of poetry itself, that look is still etched in my mind as one of the fondest memories of my childhood.

What applied to English poetry was equally applicable to his music. He could never sing a song just for the music, or for cheap thrills. The meaning had to be heart touching. Then the music had to be soul stirring too. And, finally, the rendition by the singer had to convey the sense of the poetry and the mood of the music. Any disparity, and it would jar him, which he was quick to realize, and point out.

The First Song, of Childhood, and the Farewell Number

For me, the greatest moment in my life was the first Hindi song he taught me, which I, like so many youngsters, was so very reluctant to learn. When a tiny tot. He sat me one day and said, ‘I will teach you a song of childhood’. And proceeded to teach me:

‘O, bachpan ke din bhula na dena…’

Just remembering him sing in his baritone gets the eyes to cloud over even today. In grateful thanks for the great childhood he gave me, and the immortal gift of aesthetics and music appreciation that has been an enduring aspect of my personality.

I had never seen him refer to any book for the words of a song. We did not even have a radio at home. I just wondered how he mastered the words so well. And then I knew. The true appreciator of poetry that he was, the words left an indelible impression on his heart. For it to flow from there to his tongue was, therefore, effortless.

I heard him sing for hours, into the wee hours of the morning at times, without any accompaniment, to no one, for no applause, simply because music welled up in him. He often urged me to sing with him but I was like any typical shy son, imbibing the music, but not adding my voice to his.

There was a traditional farewell function as we were to leave school. College beckoned, and all the excitement of being a young man, and being no longer treated as a mere kid. That was the time he suggested a song. He did not force it on me but said, see if you would like to sing this song. This was the second song he taught the shy reluctant teenager. It was a long forgotten melody even in his time, ‘Ruk na sako to jao, tum jao...’ It goes like this:

Ruk na sako to jaao, tum jaao (Repeat)

Ek magar hum sabki hai fariyaad
Kabhi hamari bhi kar lena yaad (Repeat both lines)
Hum to tumhe na bhool sakenge (Repeat)
Tum chahe bisarao, tum jaao…
Ruk na sako to jao, tum jao….

Jane kab phir mile purana saathi
Jane kab phir mile prem ki paati (Repeat both lines)
Aj bichadne se pahele tum (Repeat)
Ek bar muskao, tum jao…
Ruk na sako to jao, tum jao…

He explained that ‘paati’ meant a letter; it was a poetic license for ‘patra’, and what poetic license meant. He also explained that the original singer said, ‘bichudne’ rather than ‘bichadne’. But the latter sounds better, so it should be pronounced that way, rather than like the original. Even when he sang the Sehgal numbers, he never copied his style and his intense nasal twang. His pronounciation of words was always impeccable. This was an important lesson to learn, for often later singers ape even the mistakes of the original singer, something he strongly disapproved of.

I remember the still silence in my class room in the 11th Standard when I sang this song during the farewell function. The class mates were stunned. After I finished, there was silence for a while, and then the applause of friends. I came to know later that our School Principal had tears in her eyes as I sang.

This was a number by K.C.Dey, the illustrious uncle of the great Manna Dey. It was not a very popular song, ever. But that was not important for him. His likes were never dictated by what was popular. It was solely by what appealed to his heart. And he justified singing as an art where, if the song does not tug at your heart, you have no business singing it.

He had a great fascination for melodious sad songs. He sang the beautiful Talat song to explain why he liked them:

Hain sabse madhur woh geet jinhe
Hum dard ke sur mein gaate hain (Repeat)
Jab had se ghuzar jaati hai khushi
Aansoo bhi chalak ke aate hain (Repeat)

And the Shelley poetry on the Skylark, which said something similar:

Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest thoughts.

For the young me that was an important lesson to learn. It helped shape my likes and dislikes at that impressionable age. At a time when the young were busy thinking of cheap thrills and seeking joy through singing only foot tapping numbers, I learnt that pain, separation, and unhappiness could be equally soothing if expressed in music and song. A conviction, which remains with me till date. Not that I abhor the joyous and mirthful, but the depth and intensity that pathos can convey cannot be ever matched by any mirth, howsoever lilting.


Urdu Diction, and Subtleties of the Language

The correct pronunciation of Urdu words, in which most filmi ghazals and other good songs of yester years were written, was a sine qua non of Hindi film singing for him. So that I could know the language, he requested a polished Muslim gentleman who used to visit our house almost every Sunday to teach me the language. This young man had been helped by my daddy to complete his education. He came from a very poor family but wanted to study further. Somehow my daddy came to know of him, and helped him all through so he settled down to a reasonable job. His logic was, well, we Hindus complain that Muslims are in general a violent lot; many are uneducated, and live in dirt and filth. But what do we do to uplift them? So he did his bit for this boy, who was ever grateful to him. The young man, after his marriage, came home one day and sought his blessings. He spoke impeccable Urdu. The Dilip Kumar and Naushad style of Urdu. My daddy welcomed him and invited him to come over whenever he desired. Sundays were the days this young man came, and we all ate special mutton dishes cooked exclusively by my daddy.

One day, the young man said, ‘ You have done so much for me. What can I do in return?’ My daddy was nonplussed. He was not used to taking any return of favours from anyone. He only knew how to give, not to take. He said something like that’s ok, I am so happy you thought of doing something, etc. But the young man was adamant. So he thought for some time and then said, ‘Ok, if you are so insistent, do this. My son is bright in studies. But I want him to sing too. And unless one knows good Urdu, one cannot sing. Will you teach him Urdu?’

He was more than willing. Books were bought and my first lessons in Urdu were started. The correct pronunciations of guttural words, which are a characteristic of the beautiful language, I learnt from this patient gentleman. How ‘saghar’ is not ‘sagar’, how ‘qayamat’ is not ‘kayamat’, how ‘gham’ is not ‘gum’, how ‘phool’ is not ‘fool’, when it is ‘afsana’ and when is it ‘phir’ and not ‘fir’, how it is ‘mujhe’ and never ‘muzhe’, how it is ‘nazaaqat’ and not ‘hajaakat’ – all these subtleties of the language I was fortunate to learn at an early age. And I owe a deep debt of gratitude to both these souls, my daddy for teaching me the nuances of singing, and his protege for introducing me to the delicacies of the beautiful language that Urdu is.

(To be concluded)


Ajai
12 May 2006

Sargam May 2006
The President Speaks His Mind

Something to Ponder
Mood:  sharp

Psychiatry and Its Critics

There is something about Psychiatry that attracts the most vehement protests. No other branch of medicine sees such vilification heaped on it.

And yet, those who are in the system know they are doing the best thing possible for their patients/clients. And it is the one system that is most open in discussing what needs to be improved about it. While most other systems of medicine would dismiss most protests with a shrug, psychiatry is one branch that considers ethical issues, sometimes almost to the point of becoming paralysed for action.

Every psychiatrist knows the benefits of ECT in selected patients. Every psychiatrist knows how psychopharmacology has revolutionised patient care. The grateful patient who has been saved from suicide, who has got rid of his delusions/ anxieties/phobias to lead a productive life is so very well known in psychiatric practice. The whole problem is patients who get well do not talk. They go on with leading their lives, and often want to hide their psychiatric history for fear of stigma.

It’s a rare instance that a man would speak as eloquently about his psychosis and how he got rid of it, as he would about his recent bypass, or appendectomy, or whatever.

It’s not that treatment failures do not occur in other branches. But they are accepted as part of the process. No one wants them. But no one dies a thousand deaths over them. However, in psychiatry, its opponents trumpet every treatment failure so loud as to scare so many more who would greatly benefit by it.

What do we do? Nothing, maybe. Or go on doing one’s bit to the best of one’s ability. And think of the grateful faces of those helped. And wait for saner counsel to prevail in the less charitably disposed.

Maybe it is also time for those who have been helped by psychiatry to speak up.


Ajai
21 May 2006

A poem

phlegmatic

when
last
i
coughed
up
the
obnoxious
phlegm
and
peered
at
the
purulence
i
reluctantly
recognized
myself
and
swallowed
the
insult


Ajai
3 April 2006

Simple and Complex


There is a great beauty in the simple, if only we may stop being complex.

Time, And Occasion, To Redeem Yourself, If You Will

This is what I wrote to the CMA President about the CAMJ:

Dear Dr. Collins-Nakai,

I write this to appreciate some of the effort you have put in vis-a-vis the CAMJ. Bringing in a Chief Justice for an Editorial Governance Plan, appointing an Interim Editor and Editor Emeritus, assuring editorial independence to the incoming editor, being ready to carry out changes in the JOC, are all commendable executive decisions. In the circumstances in which you are placed, and with all the strong pressures on you, I must acknowledge you are trying to put in a brave effort.

I understand the difficult predicament in which you are placed today. While you must carry out damage control, you must also walk the tight rope of protecting Association interests, and also ensure the CAMJ’s credibility as a biomedical journal does not suffer. Difficult situations to shoulder for anyone, howsoever efficient one may be.

However, I feel there is a way out. When the issue becomes very convoluted, and the knots very tangled, often a simple tug does the trick. The solution is at hand shaking distance, if one is ready to remove the blindfold which subsidiary concerns impose upon us. Archimedes tried his intellectual might to resolve the issue till lying in the bath, the ‘eureka’ solution came flooding to him as an insight. Similar will be your condition if you allow yourself the luxury of quiet introspection. And it’s not a luxury, really.

I wish to share that with you. The straight and obvious solution, which often eludes us because it appears uncomfortable to take.

What Need Be Done

Just go ahead and reinstate the sacked editors. Admit it was a mistake. You, as Association caretaker, and CMA Holdings were being embarrassed by all the writings in the CAMJ, true. But you still respect its editorial independence, will stand by its right to publish what it considers the truth if based on evidence and for patient welfare, the only two real pillars of biomedicine. You will encourage it to go ahead and become one of the best biomedical journals in the world. The editor who could make it one of the top five has the potential, and steam, left to make it rise even further. Repose full confidence in him, speak courageously to your Association colleagues and office-bearers that it be done, and be ready to face the consequences of such a bold, but correct, decision.

It is not often that destiny offers such a great opportunity to anyone to redeem herself. It has offered itself to you. Do not let go of it. I know it is not an easy decision to take. But then this is not an ordinary situation to encounter too. And this is not an ordinary opportunity thrown at you in the form of a challenge.

With one stroke, you will have quietened the entire furore. With one action you will have rewritten the entire course of biomedical publication.
We all know how inconvenient editors have been sacked before at JAMA and NEJM. We all know it was wrong, but no one had the nerve to right it. So people accepted, and most have got cynical this is the only way things function. I see this as a great opportunity for you to change it all.

Let’s forget the smaller interests. Let’s forget the clever advice that lawyers and smart alecks will offer you. They are not ill intentioned, but lack the vision that concentrating on the larger interests can lead you to. For at stake is a possible paradigm shift in biomedical publication. If once one upright editor is reinstated, and given full powers to go ahead, it will be written in golden letters in the history of such publications.

If you have the will, and nerve, to take it.

Not taking such a decision is easy. Taking such a decision, which you know your conscience propels you to but extraneous considerations may prevent you from, will be the true test of character that history, and posterity, will judge you by.

If you decide to take it, my faith in justice and fair play will be redeemed. If you decide not to, my conviction that ideals and principles are just empty phrases mouthed by us all to impress audiences will be confirmed.

You have an option. To redeem the noble, or confirm the commonplace.

If you redeem, I have no doubt the whole medical word will rise and salute your courageous decision. If you do not, well, it will be another pedestrian President who went the expedient way in another medical association. All too familiar a scenario.

Destiny Beckons

Destiny beckons. But it won’t offer many opportunities to make your impress ‘on the sands of time’.

This may be your chance.

Please ponder over what I have written when you are very calm, seek counsel over it from your real well wishers (who may be very few, really), and then take a bold decision.

I have known people who are bold but not right. I have also known people who are right but not bold. You have the singular opportunity to be both.

I pray you don’t let go of it.

In so doing, not only will you redeem yourself, you will redeem all that is good and noble in the field of medicine whose ideals have been knocked around, true, but are the only things which sustain it beyond the trammels of hypocrisy and expediency.

Will you rise to the occasion? From the way you have conducted yourself till now, I have a strong feeling you just may.



Ajai
22 Mar 2006

Posted to the Globe and Mail as E-letter


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060317.wcmaj0317/CommentStory/#comment145439

Ajai Singh from Mumbai, India writes:

The fifteen editorial board members who have resigned have shown a rare act of courage. They have risked their academic future for the welfare of Canadian medicine in particular and biomedical publication in general.

Upright editors have been sacked in medical journals before, like at JAMA and NEJM. It is for the first time that such a strong counter offensive by members of the editorial board has been launched.

If they succeed, and I earnestly hope they do, it will be written in golden letters in the history of biomedical publication. They need all the support that other publications, and the people at large, can give.

I hope questions are raised in the Canadian Parliament on this issue too.

And I hope guidelines are laid whereby upright Editors cannot be summarily sacked by high handed employers.

Posted 20/03/06 at 10:41 AM EST

Ajai
21 Mar 2006

CMAJ Continued
Why only damage control, why not redeem yourself, CMA?

Damage control exercises by the CMA President are fine, and worth appreciating, given the circumstances in which she is placed. Promises of editorial independence, and reassurances to that effect are laudatory. Changes in the Journal Oversight committee, or bringing in an interim Editor to manage the show, appointing a judge to head a committee on editorial reforms, and appointing an Editor Emeritus, who commands respect having been an earlier editor at CAMJ, and is the founder of WAME (to hopefully quieten any criticism there), are understandable moves by a concerned executive wanting to move on and prevent further damage.

The crucial point, however, still remains. There is no mention of reinstatement of the sacked editors. Why can that important decision not be taken, or a justified explanation for sacking the editors not be given? Because, all such exercises will not cut much ice, for the double standard is evident. While promising editorial freedom, it is precisely that editorial freedom which has been trampled upon in the sacking of the CAMJ editors. While asking people to move on and have trust in the bright future of the CAMJ, precisely those people who were ensuring it have been summarily sacked. With not a word of explanation.

Why can the executive not be bold enough to rectify a wrong decision taken? Or explain how its action is right? That is the crux of the issue, and no amount of dilly-dallying, or skirting the issue, is going to help.

The CMA is at an important cross road. If it decides to reinstate the editors, it will suddenly rise many fold in the eyes of the biomedical world. Contrary to what many may feel, or even they themselves may believe. If it decides to stick to its stand, it will be proved as pedestrian as many other Association heads and office bearers earlier have been proved to be.

The crucial point is whether the CMA, its president, and office bearers realize the great chance this event has given them to redeem themselves, and rise in the eyes of the whole medical community.

No one, until today, has had the nerve to take such a courageous stand.

I hope, and pray, they seize this opportunity.

Ajai
21 Mar 2006

15 Members of CAMJ Editorial Board Resign
WAME POSTING

Dear Colleagues,

Just read that 15 members of the editorial board of CAMJ have resigned:

http://www.cmaj.ca/misc/press/cmaj_release_mar16.pdf

Any more stimulus needed to read the:

PETITION ON EDITORIAL AUTONOMY AT THE CMAJ
at:

http://www.chaps.ucalgary.ca/cmaj.htm

and sign it (its still possible) at:

http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=370917

Any more stimulus needed to come out in their support?

And write about it in your own journals?

Come on, guys, let's have a heart.

Ajai
19 March 2006

What WAME and ICMJE Can Do: Values Backed By Power

The WAME and ICMJE are excellent bodies for they embody what is right and proper in the world of biomedicine. However, as I see it today (especially in the wake of the CAMJ episode), they lack the teeth to implement their recommendations.

Just look at the others.

1. Medical Associations: Medical Associations have committed office bearers who have to cater to the constituency of their members. They have a finger on their pulse, and will go ahead and do what is in their welfare, oblivious of whether it is right or not. Members of such Associations too are very aware of their rights, and see to it they are well protected by their office bearers.

2. Pharmacists: Pharmacists have equally strong Associations, which will go to any extent to protect their members’ interests. Their economic power, ability to coerce drug manufacturers, and vantage position as medicine dispensers makes them formidable adversaries to have.

3. Manufacturers: Drug manufacturers exercise their considerable clout by the huge drug industry they run and the researches they support, for which most researchers and departments, even Medical Associations, are beholden to them.

4. Patients: Patients now have numerous advocacy bodies and activist groups to support them. With wide information available on the net, and legal advice ready to seize the opportunity, patients appear reasonably well protected today. The number of lawsuits being won by them in recent years should be ample proof of this.

What does this leave out? Only two. Editors and editorial board members, and medical researchers. Let us look at editors here, for WAME represents them.

Editors have at least two bodies which represent them. WAME and ICMJE. But where is the power to implement what they recommend? We may say their power is moral, of the Right, of the stature of their members who toil to lay down guidelines and procedures. But when it comes to the crunch, when it come to implementing what they recommend, what powers do they have to pull up erring parties aside from writing letters and petitions? If someone decides to ignore what they say, what power do they have to implement what they, and we all, know, is right?

I say this not to embarrass our office bearers. I am just voicing my anguish, which must be that of many others too, including, I guess, of the office bearers of WAME and ICMJE.

I think both these organizations have a larger role to play, apart from their role to refine research and offer guidelines for editors and researchers. This role they can decide to ignore, but will do so only at their own peril.

This is the activist role. When we know the forces against which we work are so strong and committed to their welfare, irrespective of what is right, how can we be content with only laying down guidelines and writing petitions?

Values, by themselves, are only words. If not backed by the power to implement them, they come to naught. And will be trampled upon in every crunch situation. As has happened with the present CMAJ episode, and happened earlier with JAMA and NEJM.

So what do we do?

What Can WAME and ICMJE do?

Both these bodies are the conscience of biomedical research. They must give clear-cut calls to their members. When they find their members being shortchanged, they must rise in their favour.

What do we mean by clear-cut calls?

1. First of all, take an unequivocal stand. If injustice is done, it must be clearly spelt out it is so. And ask for revoking wrong decisions. Also helping those who are at the receiving end of brash decisions by appropriate legal counsel and possible placements, ad hoc or permanent.

2. Call upon members to resist this injustice by expressing solidarity with the aggrieved. Members must be exhorted to write editorials and welcome other correspondence which sheds light on such episodes. Both sides need be represented of course, but a goal-directedness in such writing is necessary nevertheless.

3. Insist on members reporting transgressions of editorial independence to these bodies, and helping them resist it in their respective organizations. Otherwise, token espousal of editorial independence is all we will ever get. And its perpetual flouting by the unscrupulous is what we should perennially expect.

4. Adopt method of peaceful noncooperation with the aggressor. Associations fire upright editors when they become inconvenient. Pharmacists pressurize Associations to protect their interests. Manufacturers pressurize researchers and institutions by their money power. Why should not WAME and ICMJE pressurize unscrupulous employers by asking for peaceful noncooperation with their efforts by its members? How? By:

i. Not taking up editorial positions in such journals.
ii. Not reviewing papers for such journals.
iii. Not writing for such journals.
iv. Exhorting those who work for such journals, so to save them in the interim, not to do so. For their intentions are honourable, but misdirected at such times. And likely to blunt the offensive.
v. While we recognize the right of employers to hire or fire, they must recognize our right not to allow biomedical research to be directed by the whim and fancy of highhanded employers.

5. Lay down guidelines for editors and employers. Editors need to be on par with the Association Secretary, or Executive Vice-President, whatever, and report to the Executive Body of the Association, and finally to the Annual General Body, rather than to any individual. They can be impeached, even fired, but only after a statutory body of the Association gives them a full hearing.



Signing off, For Now

The promise such problems offer is tremendous. Provided we are ready to rise to them.

ICMJE and WAME have an excellent opportunity to prove they are not, and never will be, paper tigers.

It is only when they realize that the values they stand for can be backed by the power they have, but is still untapped: the strength of their members, and the clear-cut decisions of their office bearers.

I have great hope in the future of these organizations, and request its office bearers to help actualize this hope and the legitimate wish of its members.

Ajai
17 March 2006

Gandhi, the Movie

Watched the movie Gandhi in Holi Day.

Decided to see it atleast once every six months.

A life such as this is very much after my own heart.

Ajai
16 March 2006

A Poem on Holi Day

Silent and Listen

Did you realise that the two words
Silent
And
Listen
Have the same alphabets?

And aptly so.

For
You
Cannot be truly silent unless you listen.
And
You
Cannot truly listen unless you are silent.

And
If you can combine
Silence with Listening
What happens?

Silences roar,
Listening converses,
Intellect unfolds,
Enlightenment reigns.

Ajai
15 March 2006

CMAJ: A Misty Image Indeed

Some of you may feel this deserves a look:

A Look At CMAJ: A Misty Image Indeed

http://mensanamonographs.tripod.com/id140.html

Ajai
13 March 2006

Reserve Compensated For By Dedication
Mental Health Movement, Not Just Psychiatry

You know what a mental health activist said on reading 'R',or 'Childhood Buddy Hangs Up'(the second post on this Blog)?

She said when they come to know about someone suicidal (or actively sick psychiatrically, but refusing treatment), they just call up, and get talking. And then go and visit the person in a group of two or three. Having herself suffered a psychiatric problem and recovered, she can explain first hand how psychiatry helps. And she has no qualms saying it openly she was a patient and has recovered, though on maintenance therapy.

The person is very reluctant to talk or meet them initially. But if handled tactfully, he/she relents by the end of the meeting, and treatment can get started.

So, the psychiatrist’s professional reserve is compensated for by a mental health activist' s dedication.

Hence, the mental health movement, rather than just psychiatric care.

A sobering, though enlightening thought, perhaps?

Ajai
14 March 2006

Musings
I WONDER, AND I KNOW

I wonder why, knowing so very well that the sacking of the CMAJ Editors was wrong, how come seniors and the influentials are not doing anything about it? I don't even know the sacked editors. I feel like fighting for them. Why not those who know them so well?

And now I probably know why:

1. They all know it should be done.
2. They all know it won't be done.
3. They all wait to be the chosen one.

Sometimes, when we speak less, we speak so much more.

Ajai
11 March 2006

Tiger and Horse
A TOOTHLESS TIGER, A DEAD HORSE?

Two thoughts just struck me with regard to the CMAJ episode, one with regard to Associations without executive powers like WAME and ICMJE, and another with regard to myself:

1. Are they paper tigers?
2. Am I flogging a dead horse?

Ajai
10 March 2006

For Reinstatement of Sacked Editors at CMAJ
AN APPEAL

The Editor-in-Chief and Deputy Editor of a Journal, who brought it to scientific respectability, are summarily fired by a three-paragraph announcement
http://www.cmaj.ca/misc/press/feb20.shtml/

The Editor appointed in his place, along with another Deputy Editor, resigns just a week later on the issue of editorial independence.

Respected journals like the BMJ
http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/332/7540/0-f?ehom
and Lancet
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140673606682779/fulltext/
write editorials denouncing the ouster.

WAME President
http://www.wame.org/cmajed.htm
and ICMJE
http://www.icmje.org/cmaj.htm
are equally distressed.

16 out of the 19 editorial board members of the Journal risk their positions, and potential careers, by writing a petition asking for the reinstatement of the Sacked Editors:
http://www.chaps.ucalgary.ca/cmaj.htm

Will you not do a simple act of expressing solidarity with these struggling against injustice and highhandedness?

Just go to
http://www.chaps.ucalgary.ca/cmaj.htm
read what’s written there and express your solidarity with them by asking for restoration of the original editorial board by filling up the form at:
http://www.questionpro.com/akira/TakeSurvey?id=370917

One good act. It costs you nothing. But it expresses all the values you always stood for, and admired in others.

Just do it.

I did.


Ajai
9 March 2006

On International Woman's Day
This is what men want to believe:

Woman, without her man, is incomplete.

This is what every woman knows:

Woman, without her, man is incomplete.


Ajai
9 March 2006

Response to three points raised by Fiona Godlee, Editor BMJ, on Sacking of CMAJ Editors
Dear Fiona, and Colleagues,

Thanks indeed for your input. The three points you raise are indeed very important, and must be seriously answered before we proceed further.

Point no 1.
1. Relations between the editors and the CMA seem to have been too far damaged to be retrievable in any way that would lead to a good future working relationship.
Does it mean that when relations are damaged it is the editor who must face the axe? This sanctions highhandedness every time, for the employer will resort to it whenever he feels an editor becomes inconvenient to him beyond a point. Irrespective of whether the editor is right or wrong.
It maybe all right in a private concern or a corporate enterprise, for profit is the main motive there. But here, why can not the employer, who is not a private party but an institution, do a self analysis, and remedy its thinking? Because if this is remedied, the working relationship is automatically remedied. There is no fight then at all.
An editor working against the welfare of a journal need be sacked. True. But where is there any proof this has occurred here? In fact all evidence is to the contrary.

Point no 2.
2. It is not clear to me that the editors themselves want to be reinstated.
They have desisted from speaking probably since they appear to be bound by the confidentiality clause. And canvassing for themselves may not appeal to their sensibility. I think I respect them the more for it.
Although, if they do not want to be reinstated there is no purpose working further. So, some form of confirmation that they are willing to work for CMAJ if the atmosphere is conducive would be in order.

Point no 3.
3. Such a request is unlikely to meet with success.
Such a request has not succeeded in the past. True. Because we have always worked half hearted. In a way, we have accepted the sacked editors fate even as we write that the action of sacking is wrong. And made the proper noises so we all feel self righteous and find an outlet for our moral anger without getting involved in the action to convert it into a movement for the right.

Just tell me a simple thing. If all the editorial board members resign, no new worthy board members take up the work, researchers ask for their papers back and do not send their research work till the editors are reinstated, how can any journal run?
Will not the highhanded employer bend on his knees?
And if questions are asked by members and an agitation started in CMA, and the Canadian parliament too discusses this, what will happen to the smug employer who feels he can ride roughshod by firing anyone by simply making a one-line comment that after ten years there should be change?

I think, Fiona, what you felt earlier when you thought we call for a letter in our individual capacities was right.
Hope you allow the ideal to triumph over the expedient.

We seek your cooperation. And guidance too.

Ajai
7 March 2006
……………………………………………………………………………………………..


Fiona Godlee wrote:

Dear Ajai and all,

I did consider calling for this, but decided against doing so, on three counts

1. Relations between the editors and the CMA seem to have been too far damaged to be retrievable in any way that would lead to a good future working relationship.
2. It is not clear to me that the editors themselves want to be reinstated.
3. Such a request is unlikely to meet with success.

But I would be interested to hear other views, and to invite people to join the debate on this in the rapid responses on bmj.com.

http://bmj.bmjjournals.com/cgi/eletters/332/7540/0-f

All best wishes, Fiona

Dr Fiona Godlee
Editor, BMJ
BMJ Publishing Group
Tavistock Square
London WC1H 9JR
Telephone +44 (0)207 383 6002/+44 (0)1223 327324

Personal Assistant Julia Burrell
jburrell@bmj.com
Telephone +44 207 383 6102
Fax +44 207 383 6418

Posted by psychiatrist400080 at 11:13 PM EST

Share This Post

Post Comment | Permalink

Some Submissions
This is the letter I wrote today morning to all the fellow members of WAME:

Dear Colleagues,

Below is the text of the letter WAME president Dr. Michael Callaham has sent to the CMA president Dr Ruth Collins-Nakai, as well as to the Journal Oversight Committee:

--------------------------------------------------

Dr. Ruth Collins-Nakai
President
Canadian Medical Association
Ottawa, Ontario

Dear Dr. Collins-Nakai:

The World Association of Medical Editors (WAME) leadership is concerned by the recent termination of John Hoey and Anne Marie Todkill from their positions with the Canadian Medical Association Journal. These two WAME members are widely respected editors and media reports suggest that their termination was based on their editorial decisions and may have had a political agenda.

WAME's policy on editorial independence (http://www.wame.org/wamestmt.htm#independence) states, "Editors-in-chief should have full authority over the editorial content of the journal, generally referred to as 'editorial independence.' Owners should not interfere in the evaluation, selection, or editing of individual articles, either directly or by creating an environment in which editorial decisions are strongly influenced." Other organizations have similar policies on editorial independence (for example, http://www.icmje.org/#editor).

We believe the principle of editorial independence is critical to the role of the editor "...to inform and educate readers, with attention to the accuracy and importance of journal articles, and to protect and strengthen the integrity and quality of the journal and its processes" (in http://www.wame.org/wamestmt.htm#independence), as well as to the credibility and reputation of a scientific journal.

We are concerned whether this principle has been violated, and therefore request that the Canadian Medical Association address these concerns with respect to this matter publicly, frankly, and promptly.

Yours truly,


Michael Callaham, M.D.
President
World Association of Medical Editors (WAME)
http://www.wame.org/

---------------------------------------------------

My submission:

1. Excellent first letter by the president. I would most respectfully submit that a second letter be sent asking for response as to what has the CMA done to address, 'publicly, frankly, and promptly,' the concerns raised by the WAME president.

I would also urge that in this second letter, the WAME president ask for reinstatement of the sacked editors, unless he feels they are guilty of some gross impropriety, editorial misconduct or dereliction of duty. In which case, there is no purpose continuing this effort. He can also ask whether the CMA president feels, or has proof, such is the case.

As a representative body of editors from all over the world, it is both the duty and an opportunity for WAME to make its point about editorial independence, and journal integrity. It should itself do so 'publicly, frankly and promptly'.

2. I would also urge fellow editors to write edits in their respective journals denouncing the action and asking for reinstatement, as also writing letters to the CMAJ and CMA urging justice be done.

3. Some of you may feel this is not an issue for us to discuss at all. It is only a private matter between an employer and an employee. I beg to differ. This will be the argument of any employer who holds the cards, and would want to regulate the game. For long have we believed that he can.

It is not only a private matter between an employer and an employee. The product of this employer-employee interaction is scientific knowledge and research advancement, which are of great importance to society. Hence, let us realise that it is really speaking a matter of scientific concern, biomedical advance, ethical conduct, and editorial independence. For all of which we toil day in and day out. Our unequivocal stand will have far reaching ramifications if we do not allow our minds to be paralysed by analysis of subsidiary concerns.

I wish to thank many of my colleagues who have boldly appreciated this effort. I do not even personally know the sacked editors. If I could do it, why not you?

Silence, at times, is deafening. Do not be a partner to the quieting of your conscience. You will regret it every time you still that inner voice because of practical considerations, or fear of censure from powerful but unscrupulous sources. Because Silences can Roar!

This is the time to put your shoulder to the wheel, my friends.

I am sorry to make a Sunday morning introspective rather than exhilarating.



Ajai
5 March 2006
……………………………..

CMAJ EDITORS' SACKING
Mood:  energetic
Follow the Five Point Agenda

It is heartening to note that BMJ, Lancet and ICMJE have all categorically condemned the act. With the WAME president's earlier letter, I think that is a sizeable effort in the right direction.

However, one point need be noted. None of them has asked for the sacked editors to be reinstated. None. I would like to be corrected on this, if possible. I find that disconcerting. Does it mean they have accepted the sacking, and are only voicing their opinion on principle? I hope it is not only that.

Ideals and principles are not a substitute for action. In fact they should be a spur for effort. Moral indignation does not necessarily translate into moral courage, or concerted action. This is the time for concerted action that springs from moral indignation.

We must ask for reinstatement of the sacked editors, as well as those who resigned later. Nothing less than that.

Please note that the sacking of earlier editors at JAMA and NEJM met with the usual noises and it all subsided. But sometime, at least sometime, let us girdle our loins and prepare for a showdown. Else editors will shout and rant, and employers will win. And editorial freedom will be voiced but not defended.

The only way highhandedness of employers can be handled is by peaceful noncooperation. This means:

1. The entire editorial board of CMAJ must resign;
2. No one should accept editorial board membership;
3. CMA members should start an agitation for reinstatement;
4. Researchers should ask back for their articles;
5. And the Canadian parliament should be asked questions in.

Once one editor of integrity is reinstated. Only once. No employer, or association president, or commercial interest, will ever dare touch, or manipulate, legitimate editorial freedom.

Every time we only make noises and accept, every time editors will be upturned when they become inconvenient. And nothing substantial will change, except for the filling up of journal and discussion pages with high-sounding principles.

That is the challenge, my friends.


Ajai

4 March 2006