All I did

A few weeks ago, the Hindustan Times announced a "One Amazing Story" contest. It was part of Penguin's promotion of Chitra Bannerjee Divakaruni's new book, One Amazing Thing. I submitted the entry that's appended below, "All I did". It didn't win anything, but never mind. (Though excuse me while I go cry in the bushes. There, I feel better now).

The three winning entries are here.

Thoughts welcome.

***
All I did

At a tribal gathering in Santrampur, Gujarat, Deepakbhai Vaghari watched me taking notes. Then he introduced himself and whispered: "Why not see how we really live?"

Made sense. A brisk walk through Santrampur chaos, and: "Look," said Deepakbhai, pointing past black ooze and casually flung garbage to several shacks amid thorny bushes. "Our homes."

We negotiated the miasma. At Deepakbhai's hut, I bent low to look in, then blurted: "So much tidier than my home!" Because it was. Said namaste to his shy wife and their daughter, playing in the dust.

And this was all I did, no more than I would with anyone. But how altogether foreign even this much was to Deepakbhai, I would soon learn.

Walking back, he stopped unexpectedly. "The feeling for the poor I see in your heart", he said, he paused, "don't ever lose it."

In my eyes, sudden tears.

Jangalnama: a review

Today's DNA (May 23 2010) carries my review of Satnam's Jangalnama (translated from the Punjabi by Vishav Bharati): Boys and girls who became guerrillas.

Your comments welcome.

Conversations, #10

I'm falling behind in posting these! Put it down to the driving trip through the south I'm still on -- nearly 3000 km, and counting. Another 3-4 days before we're done.

Here's the tenth installment of the conversation between Beena Sarwar and me over the last few months: The trust deficit.

Previous: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8, #9.

Martin Gardner

Martin Gardner would have been 96 this year, and no doubt if asked he would have offered all kinds of interesting characteristics of that number, including puzzles. Sadly, that won't happen, for he died yesterday.

He was probably best known for his long-running column in Scientific American, "Mathematical Games". In the years I had a subscription to that magazine, it was the first thing I read in every issue. It was always a cornucopia of puzzles and theorems and mathematical curiosities, and it spoke of a keen and always questioning intellect. In that sense, Gardner was an inspiration to me from my teenage years.

But Gardner was also, notably, nobody's fool, and he made it his business to debunk all kinds of pseudo-science mumbo-jumbo -- from Uri Geller's spoon bending "feats" to UFOs and much more. His books doing this debunking are an object lesson in clear thinking and no-nonsense writing, and that was an inspiration too. I have Fads and Fallacies on my shelf, among some of his more mathematical books, and it's a book I will always treasure.

Go well, Mr Gardner. For me, you made mathematics real. You made it fun. I can't thank you enough.

(Scientific American's profile of Gardner is here).

Mangalore crash: wills and shoulds and shalls

What follows is long. But you should read it. It was written by the men named at the bottom. I got it by email earlier this evening, and have posted it here with only a few cosmetic changes.

Note especially the numerous emphasized instances of "will be" and "shall be" and "have to" and "shall comply". Much of it reminds me of court judgements concerning dams on the river Narmada, but I'll save those reminders for another post.

My thoughts are with the families of those killed in this horrific crash. It should never have happened.

***
An Air India Express Boeing 737-800 aircraft arriving from Dubai with 167 on board 2010 tragically crashed at Mangalore International Airport at 6.30 am today (22 May 2010). It is reported that the plane overshot the runway while landing and fell over a cliff resulting in this disastrous crash. Very few are known to have survived this horrific crash. This was no accident, but the direct result of deliberate failure of officials at the highest level in the Director General of Civil Aviation, Airports Authority of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation and the Government of Karnataka for allowing this 2nd runway to be built in criminal negligence of applicable norms and standards.

Such a strong charge is being made as the likelihood of this kind of a crash (the worst case scenario) was predicted. A series of Public Interest Litigations (PILs) were fought by the undersigned to stop the construction of this 2nd runway in Mangalore airport on grounds that the design simply did not conform to the most basic national and international standards of airport design. The PILs also highlighted that the airport does not conform with the most minimum safeguards for emergency situations particularly during landings and take-offs, and could not have emergency approach roads within a kilometre on all sides of the airport as required.

It is truly sad that because of the failure of key decision makers at the highest levels so many innocent lives have been lost. It is quite possible that many lives were lost as emergency rescue teams could not access the crash site due to the difficult terrain (a valley) for over a hour after the incident, even though it was proximal to the site. Vimana Nildana Vistharana Virodhi Samithi (Local Communities Alliance Against Airport Expansion), Bajpe and Environment Support Group had repeatedly highlighted the high risk expansion of the Mangalore airport during the late 1990s.

The expansion was proposed to enable flight movements of wide bodied aircrafts, such as Airbus A320. Authorities were repeatedly informed that the proposal did not at all conform with the standards prescribed for runway design as laid down by the Director General of Civil Aviation, National Building Code of India and Ministry of Civil Aviation. Further, considering that the airport was proposed for international flights, a case was also made that the 2nd runway could not conform with International Civil Aviation Authority standards due to terrain limitations. No one in authority cared to listen to our fervent pleas. This even when we demonstrated through a variety of representations that that the site chosen for expansion at Bajpe was surrounded by deep valleys on three sides of the runway and did not provide for emergency landing areas as required. This neglect of our legitimate concerns forced us to move the High Court of Karnataka in a PIL in 1997 (Arthur Pereira and ors. vs. Union of India and ors., WP No. 37681/1997).

A key concern raised was that the 2nd runway in Mangalore could not meet the standards required in dealing with an emergency, particularly during landings and takeoffs a time when air crashes are most likely tto happen. The Airports Authority of India filed an affidavit in Court dismissing all our concerns and stated this, amongst other things:

It is submitted that as regards the apprehensions of the petitioner that the Length and width of the runway is insufficient for a plane making an emergency landing, the same is without any basis. It is respectfully submitted that all the requirements as per the ICAO recommendation will be met and that there has been no infringement of any of the recommendation and limitation therein.

(Emphasis added by DD. Copy of this affidavit dated 14 October 1998 is accessible here).

On the basis of this affidavit, Hon'ble Chief Justice Mr. Y. Bhaskar Rao and the Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. M. Farooq (as their Lordships then were) dismissed this PIL ordering as follows:

It is stated that the fear of the petitioners that the runway is insufficient for any emergency landing of a plane is without any basis since before the project is to proceed, the authorities will be meeting the recommendations of the ICAO. It is also stated that there is no basis for the allegations made by the petitioners to the effect that the various safety measures have not been followed. That on the other hand they will be getting all the relevant materials described by the petitioners which will be followed in letter and spirit without which the airport would not have been conceived in the first place. Thus it can be seen that the expansion of Bajpe airport project is at the initial stage and the second respondent has in their objections mentioned above unequivocally stated that all the safety measures etc., stated by the petitioners in their writ petition will be followed during the progress of the project and nothing can be said before the lands are handed over to the second respondent. Considering these facts, we are of the view that the petitioners have rushed to this court before commencement of the project itself and the writ petition is premature. It is not, therefore, necessary to consider the various grounds taken by the petitioners in the writ petition to allege that the respondents have been proceeding with the project in a casual manner. There is nothing to doubt about the statement made by the second respondent in their objection statement and we are sure that the respondents will be taking all necessary measures under the different enactments etc.., before proceeding with the project in question. The writ petition stands dismissed.
(Emphasis added by DD. A copy of this order is accessible here).

Even though alternative sites existed, the authorities proceeded obstinately to expand the airport yielding to pressures from business, real estate and hotel lobbies who benefited immensely from an airport at Bajpe. Politicians keen to make the expansion a part of their legacy overlooked all concerns raised. Even at the existing Bajpe alternative sites existed to expand the airport, that conformed with most safety norms, but this site was not pursued as it would affect large landholders and influential people. Consequently, nothing whatsoever was done to respond to the concerns we raised about the risks involved in the second runway. The Airport Authority did not even have a proper feasibility study, and claimed that such a critical information detail would only be prepared after the land was acquired for the airport. Surely this amounted to putting the cart before the horse, for the study, even if eventually prepared, would have been tailor made to justify the decision to so expand the airport.

Distressed by such a turn of events and the absolute lack of compliance with applicable norms and standards, we appealed to the ICAO to intervene in the matter. The ICAO did not respond and so we returned to the High Court with a fresh PIL in 2002. In this exhaustively researched PIL many significant concerns were raised and a case was made that the 2nd runway could not conform with ICAO norms for the following reasons:

Minimum Area for Stop-way: At page 155 of the said (ICAO) report, para 2-1 prescribes standards for providing the minimum area for a stop way and/or a clear way in the event an aircraft undershoots or over-runs the runway. For instance, if an aircraft has initiated take off, and a technical flaw requires emergency stop, the standard prescribes the minimum area that should be kept free to enable such a stop. In the instant case, the runway distance itself is about 2400 metres, and even if the area left is most cautiously utilised, what is left is only about 300 metres on each end of the runway. By the prescribed standard, this is far below the required distance needed for an emergency stop way. Therefore, the chances of an aircraft that has achieved the decision speed forcing an emergency stop are critically minimised, and the inevitable consequence could be that the plane would come crashing down the hillsides from a height of 80-100 metres on either side of the proposed runway.
(Emphasis added by DD. A copy of the PIL is accessible here).

The High Court of Karnataka dismissed this PIL initiative by their order dated 27 May 2002 (WP 20905/2002) stating the following:

No doubt, in an appropriate case, this Court can issue directions, if there is gross violation of fundamental rights or if the issue touches the conscience of this Court, but not for personal gain or political gain. The construction of 2nd Runway and Terminal Tower in Mangalore Airport will otherwise be in the interest of public. Learned Counsel has not been able to show how the construction of 2nd Runway and Terminal Tower in Mangalore Airport will be against the public interest. On consideration and in the facts of the given case no direction as prayed for can be issued in this PIL. The authorities concerned have to complete all formalities as per law before commencement of the project. Accordingly, this Writ petition is dismissed. However, it is made clear that dismissal of this petition will not preclude the concerned Authorities to take all necessary precaution and to complete the formalities as per law before proceeding with the project in question.
(Emphasis added by DD.)

In a desperate effort to stop the Mangalore airport from so expanding and needlessly exposing innocent people to unnecessary risk, we went on appeal against the High Court order to the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India. Dismissing the appeal, the Supreme Court ruled 07 February 2003 in Environment Support Group and ors. vs. Union of India and ors. [SLP(C) 1172 OF 2003] as follows:

We see no reason to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, the special leave petition is dismissed. We, however, clarify that in constructing the Airport, the Government shall comply with all applicable laws and also with environmental norms.
(Emphasis added by DD. A copy of this order can be accessed here).

One hopes with the benefit of hindsight that the Director General of Civil Aviation or Airports Authority of India had complied with this order of the Supreme Court and ensured Mangalore airport was developed in full conformance with applicable laws, standards and norms. In case the current site was not feasible, they could have easily explored alternate sites, as such sites did exist within Bajpe itself, or even in Padubidri, between Mangalore and Udupi. Instead, the authorities preferred to view the Supreme Court order as a victory, as did the Karnataka Government and Mangalore Chamber of Commerce and Industry which had systematically campaigned for the expansion. Without any further hesitation the 2nd runway construction began in 2004 and was commissioned in May 2006.

No techno-economic assessment, feasibility study, or even an comprehensive Environment Impact Assessment was ever done for the 2nd Runway. Simply put, the runway was built in comprehensive violation of applicable laws, standards and direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

On 8th March 2004, we wrote to Dr. Naseem Zaidi, Chairman (Addl. Charge) & Joint Secretary, Airport Authority of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Government of India, reminding him of the need to comply with the Supreme Court direction. In particular we highlighted that "such action would jeopardize passenger safety, put local communities to risk, needlessly dislocate people by acquiring land on a location that in no way could comply with the said provisions and thereby contributed to gross wastage of public money and resources."

We did not get any response.

Six years later today we are mourning the unfortunate death of so many people who should have been alive. We are clear that this is no accident, but a direct result of the series of deliberate failures of officials and key decision makers at the highest levels of all authorities connected with the decision to allow the 2nd runway to be constructed and commissioned.

Of course all sorts of explanations will be on offer, but none of that can bring lost lives back or cure the tragedy that has wrongly befallen so many families. India today is frenetically building airports all over, and for all sorts of flaky reasons. Such is the political, bureaucratic and corporate pressure to build and expand airports that anyone questing the rationale is quickly dubbed as a "busybody", "useless interloper", "promoted by vested interest" and raising "frivolous" concerns.

To ensure such incidents do not recur, we demand that the Union Minister of Civil Aviation orders an impartial Commission of Enquiry into the causative factors of this crash, especially investigating the absolute lack of conformance with basic runway design standards and emergency approach measures.

As a small tribute to those who lost their lives in this tragic air crash, ESG offers to assist crash affected families to initiate a damage suits against the Government. We will also initiate criminal negligence proceedings against all authorities connected with the decision to commission the 2nd runway at Mangalore in violation of the directions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We take these corrective actions in the hope they would serve as a deterrence against the lackadaisical approach to critical decisions by key decision makers.

Leo F. Saldanha, Coordinator, Environment Support Group

Arthur Pereira, Trustee. Environment Support Group and Spokesperson, Vimana Nildhana Vistarana Virodhi Samithi, Bajpe, Mangalore

Not two, but four

On the road in southern India, still unable to find enough time to post here. Never mind. But I did read that Lalit Modi has submitted a reply to the show-cause notice the BCCI has issued to him. That reply runs into thousands of pages. It occasioned this comment from his legal counsel, Mehmood Abdi, as quoted in The Hindu yesterday (May 16):

"For an eminent lawyer and BCCI President Shashank Manohar, it should not take two hours to read 2000 to 5000 pages ... He should be able to read all the pages and wind up in four hours."

Ah, that's a relief. For a moment there I thought Abdi expected Manohar to read the pages in just three hours. Luckily he's allowed four.

Conversations, #9

Been on the road driving for four days, as always plenty to catch up on here. Don't know if I'll get to it all, but let me try.

The ninth installment of the conversation Beena and I have been conducting went on air some days ago: Perceptions, perceptions.

Previous: #1, #2, #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #8.

100s of 1000s

"Imagine this: There are hundreds of thousands of Delhiwallahs and Gujaratis among us, who took part in the killing, raping, burning, maiming and looting of thousands of Indians who did them no wrong."

That's Aakar Patel, writing here. Those and everything else in the essay, words I wish I could have written, but I'm glad he did.

Tweetledee

Just feel like I'm coming to grips with the Twitterverse. In some ways it seems an even more peculiar place than the blogosphere always has been.

Consider two random exchanges I stumbled on recently.

Sachin Tendulkar recently joined Twitter, setting hearts and fingers a-twitter everywhere cricket is spoken. I wandered over to his page at some point in the last couple of days, to find a message from him to another tweeter. Idly clicked through to that person's page, to find a series of tweets imploring ("please please please") SRT to say hello to him. Which eventually SRT did. Which prompted a ferventweet of gratitude ("thank you thank you thank you").

Fine so far.

Then I see on this same person's page two tweets directed at Salman Khan, the actor. They had me furrowing my brow, so I wandered over to check what SK had tweeted to prompt these. This was it, in full and verbatim: "Plz wl cm sania mirza."

"Please welcome Sania Mirza", for those who cannot grok twitter.

And this had our "please" and "thank you man" saying, and I paraphrase the two tweets here, "Definitely not! Couldn't she have found a boy in India? Sister of Kasab!"

Brave

Man drives to a crowded square in a huge city with a crude but powerful explosive device(s) in his car. Man leaves said car there with engine running and melts away. Man later tries to board a flight for the other side of the world.

And in some twisted quarters, this same man is said to have done "a brave job".

The aim

What is the aim, after all? Revenge? Or an end to terrorism?

Of course I refer to Kasab. Who believes he is anything other than a pawn in the hands of much more powerful and sinister men, who have no shortage of pawns? Who believes that Kasab came to this city expecting anything other than to die after doing his killing, just as his comrades all died? Who believes that for future pawns with that expectation, handing Kasab a death sentence -- giving him exactly what he expected, in other words -- is going to actually be a deterrent?

I cannot imagine that too many folks reading this would believe those things.

So therefore I wonder what we truly want. Some feeling of revenge exacted by executing a nonentity? Or to identify, capture and punish the real powers behind the terror that happened on 26/11, so it never happens again?

I want the second.

I believe it will be the highest form of justice for those who were killed during 26/11. I believe it, and not revenge, is the best way to fight terrorism. I believe it's far more likely we will get there with Kasab alive than Kasab dead.

700, 799, 849, free

If it is a "much awaited Rs 700" item, why is priced at Rs 799 and why will its "total cost... go up to almost Rs 849 when you buy it"? (As reported here).

And if that happens, why not call it the "much awaited Rs 23.50" item, or even the "much awaited free" item?

About Ghosh and an award

The writer Amitav Ghosh, certainly one of my favourites, is in the middle of a roaring controversy over an award. I just put up some of my thoughts about it here.

Any thoughts welcome.

Poor numbers

Another Tendulkar, this one by name Suresh, has been getting some newsplay in recent weeks. (Gratuitous facetious question: why "another Tendulkar", is there somebody else people think of when they see that name?)

You know why. The Suresh Tendulkar Committee has done substantial damage to the complacency with which we've long assumed that we're well on the way to eliminating poverty in this country. Only a few years ago, we heard from government and commentators that "only" 26 per cent of India fell below the poverty line, a great reduction from 1991 when the "reforms" began. Well, this Mr Tendulkar tells us that according to his estimates, now accepted by the Government, it's more like 37 per cent of India that's below the poverty line: 370 million people in 2005. That's projected to rise to 405 in 2011 according to today's Hindustan Times.

A few completely random thoughts about these numbers.

* 370 million is greater than the population of India in 1947. (So, for that matter, is 405 million). That is, we have far more poor Indians today than we had Indians at Independence. I think this is a statement that we could have made at any time in every one of our 62+ independent years.

* 370 million is also the number of dollars that brought an IPL team to Pune in the recent round of bidding. (As an aside about the Pune team, check Girish Shahane's sharp eyes). That is, the guys who bid for the Pune team could have used their money to hand out one dollar to each of India's poor millions, possibly nudging them over the poverty line for a day. Gives me some perspective.

* 370 million poor in 2005 rising to 405 million in 2011 is an annual growth rate of just over 1.5 per cent. (Check the numbers yourself). According to various estimates, that's comparable to how fast India's population as a whole is growing (e.g Wikipedia says 1.548, World Bank says 1.34, CIA World Factbook says 1.407, etc). In other words, the number of poor Indian is growing just as fast as the Indian population as a whole (and maybe faster). That is, we are making zero progress in reducing poverty.

Someone tell me what, if anything, I am missing.

***
Postscript: Above, I said: I think this is a statement that we could have made at any time in every one of our 62+ independent years.

Not true of course, lazily written, let me hasten to correct it. Just doing some quick calculations in my head, I suspect it's a statement that we could have made at any time in at least the last 35 or 40 years.

Not just about tennis

The May-June 2010 issue of House Calls magazine has the first of a series of essays I hope to write for them over the next few months. This one, about tennis. (The link above still takes you to the March-April issue, so you can instead read the article below.)

I called it "33, going on 40"; in print, it appears as "It's not just about tennis!"

Comments welcome, even if you're no tennis fan. Especially if you're no tennis fan. But definitely expected if you are a tennis fan, or better yet, a player. (And if you play, how about a hit sometime?)

***
The feeling comes rarely, but when it does, it's a good one. Most recently, it came during a session with Gert, a young Irish woman I had seen practicing on the wall. I asked if she'd like to hit sometime, and a few days later, we got on court. There was this one point we played, and for some unexplained reason I counted the shots that time; and that time, it just went on and on. Backhand to forehand to backhand to volley to running back to return a lob, on and on and I could feel a smile growing on my face over how well I was playing (and she was playing) this particular point, not holding anything back, fighting hard, but the shots kept going just like I wanted (and she wanted), and the years dropped away and I was moving around just as smoothly and quickly as I had ever moved on court and I could see the smile on her face too … yeah, I counted the shots, and when it finally ended and I now don't even remember who won the point, Gert and I had sent 33 strokes back and forth across the net. We stood there panting, bent over our rackets, but smiling goofily at the experience.

Then we returned to hitting. My next shot crashed into the net. Back to the grind.

Still, for me, that rally is something to savour, and I savour it still. I've played tennis for years. When I'm playing regularly and am fit, I get the feeling I can hit with anyone. My problem really is that I've never been consistent with my shots, never been able to consistently sustain a rally beyond a few strokes. So when it occasionally does happen, it's like nirvana.

What you have to understand is that for me, tennis is nearly a first love. (Nearly). Few things are as satisfying as when I smack a clean backhand winner past the guy on the other side of the net. Forehand too, but particularly the backhand. Why so, you ask? Because I always found the backhand a less "intuitive" stroke to play than others, and because when I do it well I can actually feel various body parts coming together in concert. Something about that is beautiful. Tennis, it's like that.

And when I can keep it up through 33 strokes, there's something more. It's as if the guy on the other side and I are linked by that yellow ball of fuzz, together painting a canvas of power and guile, athleticism and yes, excellence. Yes, even if I say so myself. It's why the lady and I smiled through our exertions. It's why I said that thing about a first love. It's why I feel deep in my bones that other thing that's been said before: tennis, it's like life. All the way from love to excellence.

May not be the same for everyone who plays the game, of course. Andre Agassi, for one, you'd think from a quick reading of his recent autobiography, "Open". Agassi says again and again that he hates the game. Not only that, when he first meets his wife, the great Steffi Graf, he finds that she hates the game too, and that's an immediate bond between them.

But give them their hate, it doesn't bother me. These are also two greatly driven and yet always thoughtful, introspective human beings. Agassi's pursuit of the summit of tennis tells us plenty about him, about what it takes to get there.

About, really, what's important in life.

Two examples. Early in his career, Agassi wore his hair long, then found he was losing hair, so he actually wore a wig for a while. (Astounding fact: Nobody knew. Confession: Not even this tennis junkie.) Then he tired of the charade and shaved himself bald. In many ways, this actually liberated him and the second half of his career was the brighter half by far. "Losing my hair was the best thing that ever happened to me", he writes.

At some point in this second half, his sister is diagnosed with breast cancer. She is dreading the loss of her hair to chemotherapy, but listening to her brother, she decides that she should get rid of it before the cancer takes it. "An act of defiance," says Agassi, "a seizing of control." So he brings her home and shaves her head himself. "She laughs and laughs," writes this tennis-champ-turned-barber, "and it feels good to make my sister laugh when every day does its best to make her cry."

Later, Agassi sets up a school in his hometown, Las Vegas. Not a tennis academy, which you might expect a tennis star to do, but a full-fledged and fully-equipped school for underprivileged kids. Because he thinks every kid must have an education, and the best possible one.

Near the end of the book, Agassi tells of how he has to speak to the first graduating class. He's wondering what to say, "obsessing over his speech." Eventually, he decides to speak about contradictions. "Life is a tennis match between polar opposites", he will tell them. You have to embrace the contradictions within you, or reconcile them, or at least accept them -- but you cannot ignore them. Interesting enough that a sportsman chooses such a theme to speak on. But then: "What other message could they expect," writes this tennis legend, "from a ninth-grade dropout whose proudest accomplishment is his school [i.e. the one he has set up]?"

Perhaps you're surprised that the two examples I chose have nothing to do with tennis? And yet I submit that they have everything to do with the game. Because for Agassi, it is the sustained chase to be the best in his sport that, oddly, drives home for him the value of all else in his life. It gives him the clarity of vision to know what matters and what matters less. We should all be that lucky. I mean, maybe this doesn't happen to everyone, not even to everyone who plays a sport at the rarefied level that Agassi inhabited. But the sacrifices Agassi must make, the immense satisfaction he gets from a hard-fought tournament win, these things serve only to underline what so many other things mean to him. For me, in the way it speaks to me, this is the lesson of this book, but of tennis itself.

Think of it: this is a man who won eight Grand Slam tournaments, including all four of them at least once -- a feat only a few other players in history have managed. And this man tells us his "proudest accomplishment is his school". This man understands how he can give his sister the strength to fight a battle for her life.

So, confession time again, let's get some things straight. Yes, I can hit some handsome tennis shots, every now and then. Yes, I have played with some pretty good players, and always felt I could keep a rally going with them, for a while at any rate. But no, I never played competitively. I am nowhere within screaming distance of the kind of tennis Agassi plays. Yet the longer I spent on the tennis court, the more something struck me, especially as I grew out of a youth when I actually believed I could settle for, even live with, the ease of mediocrity.

This is what struck me: whenever I play, I must try as hard as I can to play the best I can right then.

The search for that little spot of excellence is an exercise worthwhile in itself. One reward, as I found with Gert the Irish lady, is the occasional and intensely satisfying 33-stroke rally. And like every good summit will do, it only pushes you toward the next. Me, I've got my sights set on 40. One of these years …

But the greater reward is what it does for the other places in your life. If I can't play tennis like Andre Agassi, at least I can share with him a little clarity about what matters. So by now, I know: it's the family. It's the people around me. It's the effort to do whatever I do -- tennis, career, parenting, whatever -- as well as I can do it.

It's not that I need to proclaim this to the world, believe me. It's just a quiet principle I like to aspire to. You see, mediocrity just doesn't seem that easy any more. Trying to make it to 40 strokes, strangely enough, seems far more interesting.