MOST of the people who are in their 60s and 70s fondly reminisce about the times of their childhood and youth, the times that were crystal clear but like still waters not much disturbed by the undercurrents of muddy worries of worldly nature.

This was despite the fact that they did not have the joy of having much of material comforts.

That life was simple would be an understatement. It would appear that it consisted of bare minimum if seen from today`s perspective which equates happiness with material comforts. Just a brief look at the life they lived would be suffice to make the point clear. An average family which was invariably large would consume a little meat which was anyway scarce. It would enjoy meat after fortnight or a month. Even then it would buy usually one fourth of a kilo. Kids would lick their tongue in anticipa-tion. They would anxiously wait for the savoury smell to rise from their open kitchen. One fourth of a kilo meat would be prepared with potatoes in it known as `Aalu shora`.

The dish at the end of the day would be quite a quantity. It would be quite soupy which meant lot of water was put in the pot to make it so. Was it part of recipe in order to make it light and delicious or was it dictated by necessity, lack of easy affordability of the main ingredient is an open question. But the entire family of five or six would have the satisfaction of having a good meal. This frugal supper was considered a Lord`s bounty.

Neighbours would ask you to share your food and it was not a sign of ill-culture or poverty. Eating out was frowned upon and restaurants called hotels were considered dens of the infamous and libertine.

Home-made food was thought to be the healthiest.

Head of the family or a patriarch, would not have more than two or three pairs of shoes andsame number of dresses for the different seasons of the year. Nobody would throw away anything without making the optimum use of it showing a token of respect for the labour that produced it as well as the frugality of the user. No one would take him as miserly or poor.

Most of the people would travel on foot in sizzling heat and freezing cold but would not crib. Those who had bicycles were considered well off. In case of emergency one could borrow this machine, free of charge of course. People had less but were contented and thus happier. Because of what? Strong community instinct? We shall see in a while.

Our social and individual life indisputably shows that we are better off now as far as the comforts are concerned. Our contemporary family has far greater intake of calories. Meat -beef, mutton and chicken-is abundantly available and is frequently consumed, almost daily in some forms. But kids often do not touch it when it`scooked at home. Bakery products, a rarity in old times, now have ubiquitous presence and can be consumed any time. Wasting food was almost a sin but now it`s routine to bin the unconsumed food despite having the facility of refrigeration. Frequenting restaurants called `hoteling`in the local jargon is a mark of culture and social standing. Not taking out kids once in a week is taken as a sign of lack of resources. Summer or winter, no one likes to walk even small distances. People like to drive even to the local market that is just some furlongs away. Walking is for the poor. As for the dresses and pairs of shoes, it`s hard to keep the count. Hardly any space left in the cupboard and closet but buying continues. More and more buying even when you cannot use or enjoy what you buy. The things you buy or consume are a testimony to your being alive in a world ruled by global capitalism. Man is no longer the measure of things. It`s rather the other way round. But why it isso that despite having the `joy` of things, the present generation is not happy? Why the previous generation that had comparatively a few things was happier? Why having more hasn`t led to the peace of mind? Why more and more consumption has created the spectacle of experiencing less and less of what is emotionally and spiritually enriching.

Man is the most adaptable of all the animals to changes on this planet regardless of whether they are for better or worse. This quality had ensured his survival against all odds, but it is simultaneously responsible for his misery.

His adaptability has made him servile and dehumanised as it prompts him to accept the worst just to be alive. If the worst is laced with apparent pleasures, it becomes absolutely irresistible as is the case with the present situation.

Modern age no doubt has given us material comforts but at a cost.

The cost is really high as it has subliminally forced us to give up oneof our best habits, the community instinct nurtured and nourished over millennia. The mainstay of such an instinct has been the notion and practice of sharing born of our survival effort and consciousness of being human. The complex phenomena of current unbridled production and exclusive individual consumption have on the one had led to the ruthless exploitation ofnature andits resources and on the other to a slow death of community responsibilities. Now individualismunderpinned byits exclusive rights and narcissistic orientation is compelled to find less in more instead of experiencing more in less. The previous generations were happy to have what they had; less which was enjoyed as more as it was shared no matter how small it was. The current lot have much more but it has been indoctrinated to see it as much less. If human happiness was essentially linked with more, we would have been happier than all the past generations.

soofi0l@hotmail.com