Regrettably, Rahul’s passing reference to St. Stephen’s has not gone down well with certain alumni. Ironically, by objecting, they only prove him right! The willingness to welcome well-meaning criticism is basic to the culture of wholesome curiosity. A capacity for self-criticism is the hallmark of a living tradition and healthy institution. I feel disappointed when St. Stephen’s — or any institution of excellence — is turned into an idol, as though it has arrived for ever. An idolised institution remains preoccupied with two priorities: (a) marketing its brand-value and (b) maintaining the status quo so that its brand value is not diminished. The casualties in this process are: a gradual erosion of the capacity for self-criticism, the decline of the spirit of humour and the will to respond to emerging challenges, which is the secret of growth.

Let us return to the concern that Rahul has raised. There exists, according to him, a dissonance between the purpose of education and its process. The purpose is to produce thinking, innovative, excellence-seeking individuals who relate creatively to their context and contribute to the common good. A student stands in the twilight zone between the ‘given’ and the ‘not-yet’. By asking questions she moves, step by step, towards the zone of light. “From darkness to light” is a fair description of the purpose of education. What is not interrogated and debated is hardly understood. It stays anchored in the twilight zone. What is vaguely understood hardly inspires a person to seek any further than livelihood and career. The end-product of this process could well be a skilled parasite who is adept at taking as much as possible from the society, without putting anything back into it. The culture of intellectual curiosity that the academia promotes or suppresses is, in the end, inseparable from the work-culture that it produces.

... contd.