June 21, 2022
We hope you enjoy our articles. Please note, we may collect a share of sales or other compensation from the links on this page. Thank you if you use our links, we really appreciate it!
Last month the famous Indian singer, KK, died after performing a program in Kolkata. He was 53, which was not a normal age to die in our times. One could understand if one died at such an age in 19th century or early 20th century as there was no advanced medical treatment. Even though KK was rushed to hospital after he experienced pain, he died of cardiac arrest before arrival as reported by the news media. The Bollywood celebrity, Sushant Singh Rajput, died at a young age of 34. True, he committed suicide, but it was understood that no one commits suicide in normal circumstances. One does take extreme steps only in abnormal times.
What is the link between the deaths of KK and SSR? I think there is something not normal in both the cases, though the circumstances and situation of death are not the same. Were society and social circumstances responsible for these deaths? Human beings are social beings, the famous saying goes that only a beast or a god can survive on an island without social life. Social pressures too shape individual life and action. It appears the society is unforgiving in its demands. Could these deaths be avoided? I believe these deaths were not inevitable. Had KK and SRK lived in a more friendly and accommodating society, had they not felt pressure and worked under that pressure, perhaps they could have lived longer and continued their creative work. In a society, in which competition instead of cooperation, visible results instead of inner calm and peace, are prioritized, it becomes a place of mad rat race in which the vulnerable are trampled over by the powerful.
I am not blaming everything on society. Society in fact can be an incubator of moral values and education. I am also not saying competition is bad, it is in very human nature to move forward, to move higher in the ladder of success, but then what are the parameters that guide that process? Where are inner peace and moral values factored in that process? Greek philosopher Plato says famously, ‘appear deceives’, and that is perhaps a true characterization of our society today. Appearance matters more than the inner core. Outer recognition, rather than inner contentment, is counted more, for example how many likes one gets from their online posting, how many followers they have in social media forums, and so on. Sometimes individuals go to extremes, even death, for that purpose. There are reports how in the Grand Canyon National Park in Arizona individuals died because they were taking selfies in extreme locations such as on a mountain cliff, but tragically fell to death. One could argue that was their choice. True, but such choices were not the best choices.
It appears advances in science and technology, instead of making life easier and comfortable, have made life more complex, restless, and violent. More so, it appears the developments have taken away individuals from the real world and pushed them to the virtual world. We have an increasing tendency to love virtual reality and live in a virtual world. And the results have become disastrous. We neglect our immediate relations, forget who our neighbor is, forget to develop communication and friendship with people around us, but become eager to develop friendship with the people thousands of miles away. But there is never a full stop. The virtual world is like an ever-increasing black whole pulling to its core the individuals who are enamored by its ludicrous charm. Hence, as a result, many people are under pressure to keep up with the fast moving, ever morphed, virtual world. I have heard friends and colleagues say they are too busy, they have lots of posts on social media to watch and respond to, and so on. I do not consider this a very healthy trend. I am not saying advanced means of communication are not good. Technology is a double-edged sword, and it depends on the user what they want to do with it.
Coming to our original argument on social pressure, I think we tend to get more pressured by our peers and other members in our society. It is not inner conscience which drives us and our action, but the social demands and pressures. And when that pressure becomes too demanding or violent, and we do not meet its demands, the results become frustration, moral delinquency, and even death. In the height of action, the great souls, all over the world, demonstrated how they could work ceaselessly, almost twenty-four hours, without any fatigue. We study the ceaseless activity of Mahatma Gandhi, who walked to Dandi to break salt law, and went all over India to mobilize the masses for the freedom struggle. Acharya Vinoba Bhave, the leader of Bhoodan Movement, walked barefoot thousands of miles to collect land from rich landlords to distribute among the poor people. I am giving these examples to argue that pressure itself is not bad. When the pressure is positive and peaceful, arising out of inner conviction and a faith in the inner divine, then it is good. With this inner conviction the individual can jump the proverbial Himalayas. But when the pressure is from outside, when it is aggressive, the results can be disastrous.
(The article was published on Times of India blogs on June 20, 2022, under a different title: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/periscope/when-one-works-under-violent-pressure/)
