Nicest prime minister
Your cover story on Rajiv Gandhi on the 30th year of his assassination was a collector’s issue laden with truckloads of information (‘Rajiv’s discovery of India’, May 30).
Rajiv was a straightforward and honest prime minister; in fact he was one of the nicest prime ministers we have ever had. How I wish Rajiv was not assassinated. If so, at 77, he would have still been India’s prime minister.
Rajiv, with the youthful promise of change, would have taken the country to even greater heights. He, like his mother Indira Gandhi, would have kept the Congress united. I agree with you that Rajiv will always remain young, even as India ages.
Vikas Asthana,
On email.
Who is A Kindred Spirit, who wrote the lead essay in the Rajiv package? I suspect it is Rahul Gandhi. Or, is it, Priyanka? It seems to have been written by one of the immediate family members. It cannot be Sonia Gandhi. I think it is Rahul.
A write-up like that, which was quite touching, can only be written by a person who knew Rajiv very well. If it was Rahul, I wonder why he did not put his name.
Surabhi Mathur,
On email.
It was thoughtful of THE WEEK to have dedicated a whole issue on Rajiv. I remember the image of Rajiv when his mother, Indira Gandhi, was killed. Throughout Indira’s cremation, Rajiv stood in a pensive mood, which captured the hearts of millions.
Rajiv was so handsome and was always immaculately dressed. He showed to the world that he was a very well informed person. Back then, we felt proud to have such a charming prime minister.
Jothindra P.L.,
On email.
It was Rajiv who brought modern technology to India. He had many dreams about India. Perhaps it was the over-dependence on friends that put Rajiv in a spot.
May Rajiv’s soul rest in peace.
P.D. Joseph,
On email.
Only the jeweller knows a diamond’s true worth. Rajiv was an intellectual, a visionary and the designer of contemporary India.
Unfortunately, like other eminent personalities, he was also fallible. Today’s leaders, who vehemently criticise Rajiv, do so for narrow gains and ulterior motives. They cite his failures very confidently, absolutely forgetting their own imperfections.
Rajiv’s traits and deeds are still incomparable and unsurpassed. What he did for India with the limited resources, and in those circumstances, nobody else could have done.
Sunil Chopra,
On email.
India has lost dynamic leaders who ushered in constructive measures to rebuild the nation. Rajiv’s contributions in installing panchayat raj and introducing information technology bears a stamp of his far-sighted leadership.
The cruel hands of destiny has robbed away the precious lives of ebullient leaders of the Nehru-Gandhi family.
B. Gurumurthy,
On email.
Scindia’s u-turn
Scin-thesis (May 30) by Jyotiraditya Scindia mentioned the steps taken by the Centre to keep the pandemic away.
Interestingly—a ‘six-month-old infant’ and a defector—Scindia got fully transformed into a chowkidar of the BJP when he concluded the column with the comments of Mohan Bhagwat, the RSS chief.
Raghavendra Babu,
Chennai.
Who helped BJP, Tharoor?
I believe the RSS, from whence comes Moditva, was inspired by fascism. Fascism was fashionable in the 1930s and people like Joseph P. Kennedy and P.G. Wodehouse were its sympathisers (‘The craving for authoritarianism’, May 30)
I would say the upper castes—which, largely, in my opinion, control the levers of powers in our country—have strong fascist tendencies. Most of them supported the Emergency.
Does Tharoor not think that Moditva imitates Indiratva, so as to coin a phrase? Indira Gandhi did, without doubt, undermine every institution.
In my opinion, the rise of the BJP, from two MPs to where it is today, was aided and abetted serendipitously by Rajiv Gandhi (naively, think Shah Bano and the gates of the Babri Masjid) and P.V. Narasimha Rao (by all accounts, not so naively).
Rahul Pathak,
On email.
Do away with underwear
Congratulations in bringing to the public domain increasing infertility cases, especially among males (‘Vanishing sperm’, May 23). The quantity and quality of semen and the motility of sperms have reduced considerably over the last couple of decades.
While acknowledging the role of phthalates in this phenomenon, I feel that adequate importance to clothing has not been given in your cover story. The testis needs to be at a temperature that is at least 2˚C less than the body temperature. In other words, the temperature of the testes should be less than 35˚C, with a body temperature of 37˚C.
Temperatures 4-6˚C lower than body temperature has been shown to even further enhance spermatogenesis (production of sperms).
Our clothing today increases the scrotal and testicular temperature by 2-4˚C. This starts with the constant use of nappies for babies, a practice that continues till the child is a few years old. This is followed by the use of underwear, which tightly fits the groin, and is used even at night.
Parents, these days, want to make sure that bedwetting does not occur, and they insist on children wearing tight-fitting clothes and underwear at night.
The major cause in my opinion for sperms vanishing are the clothes our children and young adults wear.
Our ancestors did not have infertility. So let us do away with underwear.
Thomas Joseph,
consultant neurosurgeon,
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu.