The government this time has conferred Padmashree's to the patrons
in their respective field.Hats off to all the awardees and kudos
to the Indian government for their judgement.But one thing I dont
understand is why one is awarded posthumously.How would one know
that he has been awarded or given nationwide recognition for his
service after he is dead.Awards are given as an encouragement,
for an outstanding contribution.What's the point in giving after
death,his name will just be printed in the pages of history
without the person's knowledgethat he has done something
great.If the ministry is awarding posthumously then why not
Rani Laksmibhai,Bhagat singh,etcetra?Gandhiji was not awarded
Bharat Ratna.I think the idea of posthumous is quiet radical.
When alive we debate such that it becomes a newsheadline.
When dead,chalo forget all debate and award the dead person.
Cool funda..
3 comments:
never be one out of many..be different.
Maybe what they think is, alright this guy had done something great. We could not award him at that time, so why not award him now. By this i don mean, pick any great person from history and start giving awards. What I mean is with the relevance of the present. Especially in the armed forces. People give their lives for the country. You cannot shun them and say, ok you are dead. So you will not know anything. So we dont feel proud of your bravery.
Awards are not just for the person who is awarded. Its for the whole mankind to know, about the person, about why he was awarded. And maybe, also because people need to know how they died.
hmmm..firstly you are taking epu paradoxically.its aint like one out of tom,dick and harry.
Its basically an US motto used when all the republican states integrated to become a single
country.reps unity n strength.denotes a positive agreement.Secondly,i ve all due respects to defence forces,ve no qualms regarding gallantry awards.of course they sacrifice their lives and we ought to know how they died.But in civilian awards i think what counts is what people did when alive and we ought to know what they did for the public than of which disease they
died of.And i believe awarding posthumously just creates hype about the 'death' of the person
rather than his service,which should be appreciated when alive rather than when being burried.
And the awardees so far have put in 1/4th of their life in their fields.Why wait till he takes last breath were people blind when they were making change..
Well if you are talking about the civilian awards, there too is a catch. India unlike some western countries, is a multi party system. So even if you please majority of the people by your work, there will always be people who try to pull you down. You say, we award Mr X an award, then the papers will be full of some andu-pandu's remarks about him. Thats the problem, people tend to think about the -ve more than the positive.
Just think of Ganguly, dravid, or for that matter even yuvraj. Just think if the govt. says they will award them today. There will be a big up-roar. They aren even in the team, why award them? But just think if they officially retire from cricket. and then the award is bestowed. It will be a grand celebration.
By this i don't mean, give all awards only after everything is over. But you cant give an award for a 'big task', just because it seemed big to you. But even few things that were done for the first time, will give more value after a while.
When telephone was invented, not everyone realised it was a big change. They only realised much later.
Award a preson if he is doing something great. But don't hesitate to award a person posthumously, if by sheer negligenvce of public, his work was not recognised immediately.
Post a Comment