The award of a lifetime
I was recently going through the list of Bharat Ratna awardees and was surprised at a few things that crossed my mind as I scrolled down those big names.
First, the qualification for a few people to have been awarded a Bharat Ratna was like this... "interim prime minister", "sixth president", etc... Is becoming prime minister or president an eligibility for a Bharat Ratna? This might be an easy question to evade by telling that the work they have done during their respective terms is what qualifies them to be a recipient of the prestigious Bharat Ratna.
Second, there are only 3 awardees from the actual list of 41 winners that are living today - Dr. Abdul Kalam, Lata Mangeshkar and Prof. Amartya Sen. Many people have been awarded in the same year as their death, or a few years (2-3 years) before their death. Why would the committee realize that the individual is actually a "Ratna" so very late and so close to their death? I am only talking of the majority of cases and not the lucky few that got their worth well in time.
The topping on the cake is the list of awardees who won the Bharat Ratna about 30 years after their death. I should question the point the silly committee is trying to prove by awarding a dead person. First of all, posthumous awards make no sense except when it is from the Military perspective. What worth is recognition to the dead? At least if the recognition were immediately after death, there seems to be a hint of meaning in that people really remembered and missed the person or the person's work / worth. But why after 30 years? There might have been one or two rebirths of the awardee. An award of a lifetime offered to the dead! Now, how does that sound?
I think the committee that decides on the Bharat Ratna awardees must be constituted of individuals who are willing to accept Bharat Ratna awards themselves, twenty or thirty years past their deaths. Only then would they realize the import of their heinous decision!
First, the qualification for a few people to have been awarded a Bharat Ratna was like this... "interim prime minister", "sixth president", etc... Is becoming prime minister or president an eligibility for a Bharat Ratna? This might be an easy question to evade by telling that the work they have done during their respective terms is what qualifies them to be a recipient of the prestigious Bharat Ratna.
Second, there are only 3 awardees from the actual list of 41 winners that are living today - Dr. Abdul Kalam, Lata Mangeshkar and Prof. Amartya Sen. Many people have been awarded in the same year as their death, or a few years (2-3 years) before their death. Why would the committee realize that the individual is actually a "Ratna" so very late and so close to their death? I am only talking of the majority of cases and not the lucky few that got their worth well in time.
The topping on the cake is the list of awardees who won the Bharat Ratna about 30 years after their death. I should question the point the silly committee is trying to prove by awarding a dead person. First of all, posthumous awards make no sense except when it is from the Military perspective. What worth is recognition to the dead? At least if the recognition were immediately after death, there seems to be a hint of meaning in that people really remembered and missed the person or the person's work / worth. But why after 30 years? There might have been one or two rebirths of the awardee. An award of a lifetime offered to the dead! Now, how does that sound?
I think the committee that decides on the Bharat Ratna awardees must be constituted of individuals who are willing to accept Bharat Ratna awards themselves, twenty or thirty years past their deaths. Only then would they realize the import of their heinous decision!
Comments