Help Wanted: The Dhaba is Hiring

Before we start, two quick action alerts:

First, please sign this on-line petition against an environmentally damaging project in Orissa.

Also, petitions by  Greenpeace and others have led to public consultation on the dangerous Nuclear Liability Bill.  Now Greenpeace is sending an open letter to the Parliamentary Standing Committee in charge of changing the Bill. Please sign this open letter today itself, as the Committee needs to hear from you by this Friday (tomorrow).

****

For the last 10 months, we've been posting fresh green stuff from Delhi every Tuesday, every Thursday, and most Saturdays.  That, my friends, adds up to a lot of essays, a lot of photos, a lot of links.

We don't have nearly as many readers as India Today or Outlook. But it's a good bet that we have more interesting readers than either of them.  Business is good, and word is spreading; our stuff gets passed around and reposted all the time.  Just this week, a piece we ran in February is being highlighted at asia! Magazine.  One of our posts about schools ran in the 1st Quarter 2010 issue of Mindfields.   We've got a lot more good stuff prepped and ready to go.  Still, we think variety is one of the things that makes life interesting, so we'd like to run more writing from more people!  We won't pay any money.  You are unlikely to become much more famous than you already are. But you will get to say something interesting to interesting people.

We don't have a well-articulated editorial policy and we don't follow a particular political line. We are working for a sustainable, just future.  What that means, and how we get there, is an open question.  We are not looking for cookie-cutter pieces designed primarily to sell products or bring traffic to a business, though we are happy to run original stories about green businesses.  Here are some more specific ideas:

Guest Posts: If you like to write, and you care about an environmental issue deeply, why not send us something?  You can see examples of what others have done on our Voices Page.

Photo Essays: If a picture's worth a thousand words, just think of the value of a photo essay! We don't do nearly enough with nature here as we should.  And there's no reason the Dhaba has to be so Delhi-centric. All you need are a few photos that suggest an idea. The words are optional.  For an example of some of the photo essays we've run so far, look here.  But there are many other forms and formats for this kind of post. In fact, you might experiment with a "single shot" approach, like the column Ravi Agarwal has had in First City for years.

Best Dhabas in Delhi Series: Is there a food cart, tea stall, dhaba or dive that you just love?  Why not send us a photo and a guest review.  Low-tech is greentech and dhabas are always more environmentally friendly than 5 Star restaurants.  We've just got one review up here so far, but more are coming.  Help us add to the list!

Reviews: If reading books is your thing, why not push yourself a bit further and actually write a green book review?  If you like films, why not write a film review?  Or art! Writing about something nearly always results in you learning more than you would have otherwise. Here are the reviews we've run so far at the Dhaba.

Interviews:  Why not interview a green activist or leader you know or admire?  It's not as difficult as you think, if you do it electronically.  Just write up a list of questions and shoot off the email.  Ask them for a photo to make it look nice!  I love the interviews we've run so far.  Help us get more!

Other Stuff: You may have a completely different idea.  Try us! You could also send us a link to a great video, or a letter to Hari Batti, Agony Uncle.

You can contact us by writing haribatti123@gmail.com.  We look forward to hearing from you!

A Green Defense of Oil Subsidies: thoughts on the Bharat Bandh

There are few things more complicated than fuel price policy, which is mostly why I've avoided writing about it up until now. But few things are as important in the day-to-day lives of most people.  Fuel helps move us and the goods we need.  It powers the stoves that cook our food.  Farmers need fuel for their tractors, and much of  the fertilizers and pesticides used in modern agriculture are made through energy-intensive processes--processes that require fuel.   It is all very well and good to say we should move toward methods of agriculture that require less fossil fuel.  We should do that, but that shift will take time and a political commitment that doesn't seem to exist at the moment.  In the meantime, it is easy to see that fuel price hikes affect the entire economy from food prices to auto fares.

I wish I could say I've got the answers to the problem of rising fuel prices all figured out and ready to serve up in an easily digestible form.  I don't, but the Bharat Bandh, which aimed to shut down as much of the country as possible in protest of fuel price hikes and the decontrol of petrol prices, left me feeling compelled to take a stand: I support the stated goals of the bandh as far as they go--but I don't think they go nearly far enough.

As much as I hate to say this, in order to understand this issue, you have to understand a few simple things about how fuel prices work in India. I'll promise to make this as painless as possible, if you promise not to click the back button. 

First, about 70% of our oil is imported, so that oil is purchased at prices set by the international market.  Then, various government bodies levy a variety of taxes, which all add up to a large share of the final price charged for fuel in the domestic market.     However, the government has always sought to cushion the economy from the ups and downs of the international market by controlling domestic oil prices and by partly subsidising state oil firms for the losses they incur when international market prices are higher than the government-mandated domestic prices.  So the government gains by taxing oil; but it also loses to the extent that it has to subsidize the losses of state run oil companies for the money they lose due to domestic price controls.

The government has decontrolled the price of petrol because it no longer wants to pay these subsidies--and it's only a matter of time before it tries to decontrol the price of diesel as well. I think these moves, on the whole, are a bad idea. 

Now many of you may ask, why should we subsidize oil, of all things?  Haven't you always said that we should make people pay the full cost of the products they consume? Doesn't subsidized oil lead to more unsustainable use of cars and other problems?

Let me be clear; I think that, as a rule, public subsidies should be designed to help move us toward a move sustainable future--or to help insure access to basic rights, such as food or education. While it is true that cuts in oil subsidies may solve some problems, in the long run, unless they are accompanied by a comprehensive, justice-based program of sustainable development, these cuts will simply result in a massive transfer of wealth upward. That's because a good bit of those subsidies benefit poor people in this country, either directly or indirectly.  Given that fuel is already heavily taxed, I don't think price controls designed to help keep food and cooking costs low are unreasonable--in fact, in the current context, I think they are necessary. In a country where more than 800 million people live on less than Rs. 20 per day, policies that lead to food inflation are not just mean spirited, they are murderous.

Let's put this subsidy issue in proper context.  The current budget offers direct cuts in income tax for the upper middle class and rich, while it's spending on poverty reduction, social services and educaton remains largely stagnant.   And of course, as P. Sainath pointed out in his speech at IIC last week, the government continues to grant massive giveaways to the wealthy in this country through tax write offs and other subsidies. (If you missed the speech, you can read this or this as consolation.)  

Given that the government is drastically increasing the support it gives to the richest in this country, it seems hard to believe that the removal of oil subsidies is motivated solely by a desire to lower the fiscal deficit; rather it is motivated by a desire to cut subsidies to poor people in order to pay for subsidies already promised to rich people. The market is just a useful smokescreen. My, that sounds a bit extreme, doesn't it?  Sorry, but extreme policies tend to sound... extreme, when demystified.

Having said that, there is a lot that is very, very wrong with our current energy policy, and these things need to be fixed.  

Most obviously, a good deal of the current fuel subsidies do not do what they should be doing. Diesel fuel is taxed at a much lower rate than petrol, because it is used extensively in transportation and agriculture; lower diesel prices, we are told, are necessary to keep down food inflation.  Fair enough.  But in reality, a good deal of diesel goes into private cars. In fact, according to the CSE, the government's own Kirit Parikh panel conceded that "cars use up 15 per cent of the total diesel in the country – compared to 12 per cent by buses and agriculture, 10 per cent by industry, and 6 per cent by the railways."  The explosion of private diesel cars in Delhi and elsewhere has been driven by the low price of diesel fuel. This has nothing to do with food; but it has a great deal to do with the rise in pollution we are seeing.

A comprehensive fuel policy needs to figure a way around this.  In an ideal world, we would have a tax and subsidy structure that supported sustainable uses of fuel over unsustainable ones. Public transportation would be expanded and ticket prices kept low for all.  Fuel for shared taxis and three wheelers would be kept low, especially in areas where buses and trains are not available or adequate. 

Fuel for tractors, trucks and freight trains would be inexpensive, but animal powered farming and transportation would also be encouraged where practical. And we'd encourage local food production whenever possible: why subsidize the transportation of Punjabi rice to Kerala, if the same money could encourage southern farmers to plant more rice? All private cars would pay full price at the petrol pump since they pollute the most and take up the most room on our roads, per person. And diesel for private cars would be more, not less, expensive, since it causes more pollution. 

The problem is that we don't live in an ideal world, and so efforts to price the same fuels differently depending on how they are used invite fraud and corruption.  For example, if these policies were implemented, farmers all over the country would be tempted to resell their subsidized diesel to corrupt middlemen who would resell it for use in private cars. 

So what kind of fuel policies might a practical government implement if it wanted to be both environmentally friendly and fair?  After a lot of thought, two general approaches suggest themselves:

Approach I: Maintain fuel subsidies, but...

First, there are a host of things the government could do to encourage a more sustainable economy within a framework of fuel subsidies. We could start by encouraging good things directly. For example, public transportation could be further expanded and subsidized. Delhi buses are too crowded, and most Indian cities lack any viable system of public transportation at all.  There's a lot of room for growth in this sector! 

We could also do things to discourage unsustainable behavior. If we can't figure out how to tax private cars adequately at the pump (especially those that use super-polluting diesel fuel), then we could do other things to make them more expensive--increased fees at the point of purchase, parking taxes, etc. I'm not an expert here, but you can read this piece from CSE for a taste of how this might work in one context.

And there is a lot of good we could do simply by not investing public money in stupid places. As P. Sainath rightly said last week, it is pointless to subsidize "sunset industries" like automobiles. I'd add "World Class" airports to that list, by the way.  Mark my words, within a decade, rising oil prices--subsidized or not--are going to make the public money we've spent on encouraging the manufacture and use of cars and airplanes look silly, if not criminal!

 Approach II: Cut fuel subsidies, but...

There is another road, of course.  The government could cut fuel subsidies, while at the same time vastly expanding the support it gives to the people who actually need it. I'm not going to go into a lot of details here, because the list is long;  a few examples will have to do.  Instead of trying to keep food inflation down by subsidizing oil prices, the government could do things that would reduce hunger directly.  A universal public food distribution system would not be nearly as expensive as many people assume and it's favoured by some very bright people.  In transportation, many of the measures mentioned above, would work, with or without subsidies.  Expanding access to work under the NREGA--and increasing the wages offered under that scheme--would help, as would increasing the access of small farmers to credit at reasonable rates.

Those who complain that subsidies distort markets and should be done away with either fail to see--or fail to admit--that all economies and societies rely on some kind of subsidies.  India is no exception.  The only question is, who subsidizes who?  The problem with the current cuts in fuel subsidies is simple: at root, they are all about getting poor people to pay for subsidies to wealthy people and wealthy companies.  From where I sit, that just doesn't add up!

So You Want to Help Children: Back to School Week Concludes at the Dhaba

This week, students all over Delhi have been heading back to school, so we've been talking about issues related to education.  On Tuesday, we told students how to write at a green poem.  On Thursday, we looked at better ways to teach green mathematics.

But a lot of children don't get a chance to study properly, because they spend a large part of their days selling newspapers and magazines at some of the busiest intersections in the city. 

Tehelka, Outlook, Cosmo, and many others contract with vendors who employ children to sell their magazines.  You know this is true, because you see it nearly every day!  If questioned, the magazines will deny their responsibility--or say they have no choice, given a competitive market.  It's shameful.  If the press can't take a stand on this, who ever will? 

Well, one would like to think the government would take a stand on child labour, even if the press ignores it's own role in it.  But that seems unlikely, given the fact that so many children are at work on many Commonwealth Games projects.  This child, sleeping just next to a deep excavation in the ground, was not working on a government project when my son snapped this photo:

But these children were working on government projects.  (Many of the photos in this sequence were taken along Khel Gaon--and I saw them on the road long after this story ran.)

It's a big problem--what to do?  I don't have the answer to that question, but I can point you in some interesting directions. 

If you want to DO something: 

I've seen these three organizations in action and they are worth your support! Do give.

Deepalaya Schools: Volunteer. Give.

Salaam Baalak Trust: Learn. Volunteer. Give.

Mobile Creche: Volunteer.  Give.

A brand new group which looks promising:

One Hundred Books:  A facebook group to "collect, as well as raise funding for a hundred good books (to start with) to be donated to government schools in Delhi."

Another group that comes highly recommended:

Manzil:"a non-profit organization providing a community and resources for local youth from low-income backgrounds to learn, teach, be creative, and see the world in new ways." Based in Khan Market and Kotla.  Further info in first comment to this post!

If you want to READ something:
NGO Post: This site is full of information and volunteer opportunities.

Mindfields: a good magazine about education.

Pratham survey: good news and bad news from village schools.
Arjun Sodhi: a student who can think!

What happens when students think better than their elected leaders: Jairam Ramesh Gets a Roasting from TISS Students in Mumbai. (Via SpaceBar)

Kids' stuff, reviewed at the Dhaba:

Our Toxic World: project by Toxic Link, script by Aniruddha Sen Gupta, illustrations by Priya Kuriyan

Five Disgustingly Cool Books for Kids by the Daily Dump Team

The Beast with Nine Billion Feet by Anil Menon

The Story of Stuff (video) by Annie Leonard

The Down-to-Earth Guide to Global Warming by Laurie David and Cambria Gordon

Saffron White and Green by Subhadra Sen Gupta (short review at the end of the linked post)

Recycled Dhaba Posts about Kids and Schools:

Green Book Giving Advice: includes advice about what to do with books for kids!

What's Wrong With Our Schools and Why Environmentalists Should Care

Guest Post: Bhagwad Jal Park on Schools, Rote Learning and Rocket Science

Green Maths for Parents, Teachers, Students!

Homework Helper: How to Write a Green Poem

Homework Helper: Hydrogen Fuel for 12 Year Olds

Green Summer Holiday Homework Project: Hydrogen Made Easy

The World is Not Fair and GDP is Stupid: Economics for 9 Year Olds

Green Maths: for Teachers, Parents, Citizens!

Like many parents in Delhi, I'm thinking a lot about school these days, since my own children are going back after a Commonwealth Games-shortened summer holiday.  So this week, I'm focusing on things that relate to education.  On Tuesday, I told you how to write a green poem.  Today, I'm writing about green mathematics.

(WAIT: I know that when most people are faced with an essay on mathematics, they hit the back button as soon as they can.  This happens so quickly, it resembles a reflex response.  But IT IS NOT!  It is a learned response that most likely results from many, many bad experiences with maths.  So here's the deal I'm offering today: you resist the back button and read the essay; I promise to make it worth your while!)

For those of you wondering what maths has to do with the environment, let me just say that I am convinced that the world economy, as it is presently organized, is unsustainable, which means we need to figure out a way to do things differently or a lot of bad things are going to happen very soon.  In order to figure out how to avoid as many of those bad things as possible, we are going to need a lot of people who understand numbers. And I'm not just talking about rocket scientists, I'm also talking also about every day people who vote.  We all need to understand maths, or we can't really understand the world we live in.

Today, I humbly offer three mathematical suggestions to parents, teachers and anyone who knows someone who is not finished learning.  Then I'm going to illustrate my points with some real life word problems--photos included!  (Don't worry, I'll include most of the answer(s), and the test at the end won't be TOO difficult!)

Suggestion Number 1: Make it real.  

Let's not kid ourselves.  A lot of the problems that our kids solve in maths have very little to do with reality.  Take this one from my son's seventh standard text book:  

A car covers a distance of 89.1 km in 2.2 hours.  What is the average distance covered by it in one hour?

Average speed is something we like to talk about in the real world.  But when we do, we typically use estimation and approximation.  When I worked this problem in my head, I thought, "OK, Hari, if it took you two hours to cover 90 km, you'd be doing 45 km per hour; if it took you three hours, you'd be doing 30 km per hour.  But 2.2 hours is much closer to 2 than 3, so the answer must be closer to 45 than 30...I'd say it's about 40 km per hour."  Then I got out a calculator and found the only answer my son said would be acceptable to his teacher: 40.5 km per hour. But the calculator would be forbidden, of course.  For what it's worth, this word problem is followed by no fewer than 35 sums involving division of decimals, all which are designed to teach students to be efficient at the given paper and pencil algorithm, but none of which ask for any new thinking beyond that. 

In reality, when faced with a problem involving very large numbers or decimals, most driving enthusiasts (and most scientists, for that matter) will either estimate or use a calculator or a computer. Lacking a calculator,  most savvy shoppers will use a combination of mental math and estimation to make sure they aren't getting cheated. Aside from students, Delhi shopkeepers are just about the only people I see using paper and pencil to do sums anymore, though many of them are also turning to calculators these days. (To be fair, I once met a liquor store salesman once who took every opportunity he could find to show off his remarkable mental math strategies!)

It is good for people to understand how to solve problems with paper and pencil--but if we are drilling students so they can do that faster and faster, we are wasting our time! The reality is that we spend a lot of time teaching children to do things that are not as important as they once were, and we do this at the expense of teaching them to think about things that are important! It won't be easy to change the textbooks, but teachers and parents can do what they can to talk to children about real numbers in the real world, whenever possible.

Suggestion Number 2: Ask them why? 

Children should understand that explaining their thinking is just part of what you do when you do maths. Understanding and explaining our own thinking, whether correct or not, is extraordinarily good for learning.  In a classroom setting, if an answer is correct and a student explains how she solved it, other students will almost certainly benefit from hearing that there may be many ways to solve the same problem!  You know this instinctively: some people can follow verbal directions easily; some need to see a map. In maths, my eldest child likes numbers and equations while my youngest needs visual models, but both are capable of reaching the desired outcome: understanding! By the way, we can often learn a great deal by hearing a faulty strategy explained--as long as we aren't ridiculed for them, we really can learn from our mistakes!

Some teachers complain that there is no time for such talk. That is true if we continue to value endless drill above all else; and that would be a fine approach if our goal were simply to train shopkeepers who can do without calculators. But if we want to teach our children to be deep mathematical thinkers, we need to understand that there are places where less is more.  

Suggestion Number 3: Go beyond the numbers! 

Anyone who loves to read knows that there is more to understanding literature than simply retelling the plot. Good readers make inferences about character motivation and consider the large lessons and themes that emerge from a piece of literature. The same should be true in maths: it is important to wrestle with the ideas that go with or spring from the exact or estimated solutions to the problems we face.  Yes, the numbers are important, but they rarely exist without a context.

Practical Applications:

Let's face it: teachers these days have a difficult job. They usually have too many children in their classrooms. They are expected to prepare students to pass exams that are themselves deeply flawed. In spite of this, there are many examples of teachers who inspire their students to love learning. But society cannot rely on the schools alone to solve this problem.  Just as it is our responsibility to talk to the young people in our lives about books, we must also talk to them about mathematics and science.  It's not as hard as it sounds if you follow the three rules given above: make it real, ask them why, and go beyond the numbers. Here are some examples, based on real problems I've used in the last two weeks.  (Feel free to adapt or copy them for use in your home or classroom.)

1.  Fair or Not

Sanjay, his brother Subeer and their mother are traveling the 9 km from school to home by autorickshaw.  Auto fares have just gone up in Delhi, but most meters have not been adjusted to reflect the change.  An autowallah offers to take them home for 70 rupees.  He says he's no good at figuring and doesn't have the new rate sheet yet.  Mother knows the new rate is 19 rupees for the first 2 kilometers, then 6.5 rupees for each additional km, but she is in a hurry and agrees.  On the ride home, she asks the boys if she was foolish. Sanjay says yes.  Subir says no.  Who is right?

Reasonable answers include: 

• "Sanjay is right because the true fare should only be 64.5 rupees.  I put aside the first two kilometers, then I added up the remaining 7 kilometers in pairs (2 km costs 13 rupees because 6.5+6.5=13).  Six km's came to 13+13+13=39.  Then I added 6.5 for the 7th km and it came to 45.5.  After that, I added in the 19 rupees for the fist two km's and found the answer: 64.5."
• "Subeer is right because the autowallah is asking for just a little more than the metered fare. I rounded the 19 rupees for the first 2km to 20, then I rounded 6.5 to 7 and multiplied that by the 7 remaining km's.  20+49=69.  Yes, it's a little higher that the real rate, due to rounding, but driving an auto is hard work, and this man is being reasonable. Generous is a better word than foolish to describe what the mother did!"
• "Subeer is right. His mother has probably been paying 70 rupees for that ride for months now, anyway, since auto drivers have been refusing to go by meter!"

2. Bus or Auto?

Subeer, Sanjay and their mother are returning from school. Yesterday, they paid 70 rupees to travel the same route by auto. A red AC bus stops and the mother says, "Get on boys, today we'll take the bus."  The conductor says the mother and Sanjay have to give 20 rupees each; Subeer only has to give 10 since he is smaller.  There is nowhere to sit, but the AC is working well and the bus travels quickly, thanks to the middle lane of the BRT. On the 10 minute walk home from the bus stop, the mother asks the boys if she had done the right thing taking the bus.  Sanjay says, yes, Subeer says no!  Who is right?

Reasonable answers include: 

• "Sanjay is right because the mother saved 20 rupees, when you compare the bus fare she paid with the auto fare she paid yesterday."
• "Sanjay is right because AC buses are cool and interesting to ride in!  Also, the mother saved 20 rupees, compared with the auto fare she paid the day before."
• "Sanjay is right because the mother saved money and she helped reduce pollution and traffic by going by bus."
• "Subeer is right because the mother only saved 20 rupees, but they had to walk home AND they had to ride standing--no fun!"
• "Subeer is right because the AC bus is much too expensive.  They should have waited for a non-AC bus, which would have only charged them 10+10+5=25 rupees!

3. A World Without Buses

Subeer, Sanjay and their mother are traveling by bus.  Sanjay asks, "If the people on this bus had to travel in some other way, how many more motor vehicles would be on the road?"  After a bit of counting and estimating, they agree that there are about 50 people traveling on their bus.  Mother says she thinks that without this bus, 35 more vehicles would be on the road.  Subeer says he thinks it would be closer to 20.  Who is right?

Reasonable answers include:

• "Mother is right because most people live too far from their jobs to walk.  They would have to travel by some other vehicle!"
• "Mother is right because I see a lot of cars traveling with only one person."
• "Subeer is correct because even two wheelers often carry two or more people. I'd guess that an average of two people would go per additional vehicle and 10 would walk or take the bus. 20X2+10=50.   Subeer is right."
• "They are both wrong.  Most people who ride the bus do so because they cannot afford a private vehicle. Nearly all the people would travel on foot, by metro, or by cycle.  A few would travel by private van.  I'd estimate at most 5 new vehicles."
• "There is not enough information to make a reasonable decision.  You would need to do a survey of bus riders to find out!"

TEST QUESTION: Litter Patrol

Subeer, Sanjay and their mother are traveling by auto along Aurobindo Marg.  Subeer complains about the litter on the road.  Mother says, "Do you think more trash cans would help?" Measuring the distance by the auto's meter, they count 5 trash cans over the next 2 km, all of them at bus stops."  Subeer says more trash cans would help.  Sanjay says more trash cans would make no difference.  Who is right?

Please supply your reasonable answer in your comment below!

Homework Helper: How to Write a Green Poem

Every week, I get a few visitors searching for things like, “summer holiday homework help” or “Clean Delhi Green Delhi poems.”  This is not, technically speaking, a site set up to teach creative writing or study skills.  If you want a site like that, go somewhere like this.

However, once in a while, I don’t mind helping out a little bit with the homework--holiday or otherwise. A few weeks back, I explained how to do an interesting science project here and here.  Given that students all over Delhi are preparing to return to school, this week seemed like as good a time to run another academic post.

Today, I'm going to help those of you who are interested in writing green poetry, either because you care about the earth, or because your teacher is forcing you to.  And if you are a student (or a teacher) who’s just happened on this site, let me tell you two things up front: first, I’m a bit long winded.  Second, I promise you some very good advice and resources if you are patient.

Before we start, let’s get one thing straight: a poem is not the same thing as a slogan or a chant to use at a rally, just as a short story is not the same thing as a political manifesto. (By the way, I have nothing against creative slogans and chants; they can be a true joy, and their power should not be underestimated.  If you are looking to write one of these things, feel free to use predictable rhymes and rhythms; that seems to work for chants and slogans.  And if the issue is something you are passionate about, consider using humour or rage; there is always a place for calling a shameful thing shameful and for making fun of bad guys.)

But this post is about writing green poems, not green slogans. While it is true that some great political slogans and speeches sound poetic, and some great poems may sound a little like slogans, as a rule,  good literature tends to be more subtle than sloganeering.  However, this does not mean literature can't deal with political or environmental issues.  That may seem obvious, but I’ve seen brilliant writers miss this point completely as they maintained that environmental issues has no place in contemporary fiction.  Concerns about our environment, like concerns about race, caste, class, and gender can inform good literature, and it is silly to argue otherwise.  After all, good literature explores the issues that matter to us in ways that help us better understand the confusing and sometimes terrifying world we find ourselves in.  In fact, some argue that good literature and art play an important role in any movement for change.  As the poet  K. Satchidanandan said on the 35th anniversary of the Emergency, "Without poetry, how will people know truth, and without truth, how will they ever wake up?" 

That’s partly why Dhaba runs green poetry from time to time: it throws light from a new angle on the issues that confront those of us who are struggling to remake the world into a sustainable, just place. And more light makes it more difficult to keep sleeping.

Well, if you are a student who wants to know how to write a green poem--or a teacher who wants to learn how to teach writing in a new way--remember I warned you I can be long winded.  But you’ve been patient, and so now you will get the easy to use, first-rate homework help that I promised at the top of this post!  Let's get right down to it.  

If you are a beginner who wants to write a poem, my first advice is to avoid rhyming.  Yes, I know that many people think it’s not a poem if it doesn’t rhyme.  Those people are wrong.  Poetry is hard to define, but it does not have to rhyme, and a large share of contemporary poetry written in English does not rhyme and hasn’t for a long time. There are a lot of reasons for that; one of them is that it's harder to rhyme in English than in many other languages.  This is not to say the rhyming is bad.  I love many poems that rhyme.  It’s just that rhyming is very difficult to do well!  A good rhyme is not predictable, but neither is it awkward—in fact, it may sound so natural that you don't notice it on your first reading. (For unexpected rhymes, and other verbal music like alliteration, read this poem by Nitoo Das out loud to yourself a few times.)  

A rhyme that sounds like it is forced or unnatural is probably a bad rhyme.  And if a rhyme sounds very predictable or familiar, it’s probably because it is—and predictable, overused rhymes are nearly as bad as forced, unnatural ones. Your parents and teachers do not want to tell you this, for fear of destroying your creative drive or self esteem, but I am going to be very clear, even if it means using an over-used simile to do so: a bad rhyme is a lot like the sound of fingernails on a blackboard—it’s not just bad manners, it’s very nearly unbearable to those with sensitive ears! 

So if you are not going to rhyme, what will you do?  Well, if you feel compelled to use some sort of verbal music, consider alliteration.  But even more important is to choose a subject that you care about; if you don't care, why should your reader?!   

Now start looking for images: close your eyes and think about the sights, sounds and smells that you associate with your subject. Make a LIST.  Write whatever comes into your head for 15 minutes!  (By the way, images are like rhymes in one way: if they sound very familiar, then you are better off not using them, because they are tired and need a rest!  "The grass is always greener...two hearts beating as one...calm before the storm"-- avoid these kind of phrases! The French have a great word for them: cliches.  You can read more about them here and here.)

Take a look at how Sridala Swami's evokes thirst in "Malhar" or impossible heat in "Red Chillies."  See what a just a few striking images can do?  Anjum Hasan's "Mawlai" on the other hand, is much longer--you could almost call it a personal narrative.  What makes it a poem?  To a great degree, I would say, it's the images! 

While you are reading (all good poets read poetry, by the way), read a few of the green poems that we've run at the dhaba-- they are full of images. Some are challenging, but don't let that bother you.  I love to read poetry, and I've been doing it for a long time, but I still find many poems confusing!   That doesn't mean I'm stupid and it doesn't mean the poem is bad.  We're just not a good match.  Reading just for images, by the way, is a good way to appreciate many complex poems.

After reading, close your eyes, think about your subject, and try to find a few more great images--ones that seem new and interesting to you.  Now that you have original images to work with, you can easily avoid abstract, boring statements like, "Global warming/litter/cruelty toward animals is bad."  If you think it's bad to kick street dogs, shoot tigers, or litter, don't tell us directly; show us an image that will lead us to that understanding. Much more powerful!

After you've got lots and lots of images, try to boil your poem down to the fewest possible words. Unlike most of the prose here at the dhaba, good poetry is rarely long winded; more often it is compressed.  You can cut some of the images you wrote; only use the very best.  And no matter what your teachers tell you, reduce the number of adjectives you use; a good verb or noun almost always works better. For example, say, "punches" instead of "hits forcefully"; "rushed" instead of "ran hurriedly." 

If you are having difficulty getting started, you might try writing a poem that follows a pattern or uses an "invented form".  There are many, many interesting forms you can use that don't require 14 lines and a mastery of iambic pentameter. Try, for example, a "How to" poem. Jeet Thayil has a series of these in his collection, English. You can read "How to be a Leaf" here.  And you can read his "How to be a toad" here.  Take a look also at Nitoo Das' "how to cut a fish".  (All of these poems, by the way, bring us unexpected perspective or insight, which is part of what makes them different from a "how to" essay!)

If you don't care to write a "How to" poem, try putting yourself in the shoes of another kind of living thing.  For an example of this, read K. Satchidanandan's poem, "Cactus."  Or try a completely different form: read Vivek Narayanan's collaborative "I Heard It Is One of Many Possibilities" poem, and see if that sparks anything.  Copying a form or a technique, by the way, is not the same thing as copying a poem (or a part of a poem).  Being inspired by a poem is great; copying words directly from it is called plagiarism; not only is it in bad taste, but it's illegal and wrong!  Besides, teachers who have internet access and a bit of common sense may well catch you if you do it and that would be embarrassing at best. 

One word about line breaks for those serious students who have gotten this far: they can be very complicated, but they can also be simple; don't worry to much about them in the beginning.  Read your poem out loud to yourself and place the line breaks where they sound and look natural to you.  In general, it is best to break your lines on important words, and to avoid breaking on "little" words like "and" or "of". But there are exceptions to that "rule." Speaking of "rules", do use proper punctuation etc., unless you have a good reason for not doing so. 

Finally, have fun, take risks, be willing to learn.  And throw in a simile now and then to make things more interesting.  Good similes are like the chillies in an egg omelet--they don't take up a lot of room, but you'd miss them if they weren't there. Bad similes, like the one I'm about to use, are like worn-out shoes; they might be easy to slip on, but at best they will be unattractive; at worst uncomfortable and smelly.

Of course poets are a contrary lot.  It is a good bet that not one of them will agree with everything in this post.  And in their own ways they will be right--and wrong.  There is no limit to the ways poems are birthed.  But I'm standing by this advice, and I don't think it will hurt you to try some of it once.  Good luck, and have a great year at school!