SOME PEOPLE - II

The go-betweens:

These are a special category. They take delight in making others believe that they can get ‘anything’ done. These are the most dubious in the sense that they try to project “larger than life” images of self and keep dropping names in an effort to suggest wide contacts. Actually they may have some lower level “contacts” at class IV or III.  Through them, they get to know the names of the top brass in that organization, and keep dropping them through conversations. Because of geographical familiarity with the place they would rapidly move through the corridors and connecting anterooms.

These strides tend to suggest the “value” of these persons, though strictly they do not wield genuine influence as claimed by them. One thing about these “characters” is their silence when confronted for violation of protocols. They would pacify the officials by an unconditional surrender. At such instances, they would scrupulously avoid dropping names and carefully extricate themselves from further embarrassment. Some of these “characters” make money by promising to ‘do’ things quicker. By sheer lower level contacts, they get the jobs done at the least expenditure. Then, they would painstakingly brief the beneficiaries of how they worked through the tough protocols. This display makes the beneficiaries much indebted. A number of people fall prey to their claims until they realize the futility of the trust placed on them. For any failure, they would invent reasons and continue dropping names.

THE DOUBTING THOMASES:

By their very attainments, these are very average people. But, they have very polite approaches. They do not intend being polite but appear so, by virtue of their calculated utterances on anything. They intend eliciting information without obviously looking so. The mere effort to elicit the information has its origin in “doubting” others. They are afraid of raising or facing straight forward questions. The first thing they would do to any one is to make a loud and clear morning’s wish. There are at least two varieties of these people. One variety is intensely in doubt of being totally neglected. The other too is in doubt with varying degrees of it, in relation to the personal priorities to an item. Those with a higher intensity of doubt ensure that we ‘receive’ their morning’s wish. For this, they would intercept while we are walking and come to a point blank range before saying “Good Morning Sir”. The intention is, a morning’s wish shall be registered even if a degree of indecency creeps in. If someone objects to this style of interception, they would not hesitate to tender profuse apologies and rather take it as a route to get closer to us by explaining the well-meant “Good Morning” with no mala fide intentions. At the end of it they would wind up with one more Good morning signaling the cordiality achieved. Those of the lower category of the Doubting Thomas are careful not to irritate any one. They would choose to meet the person concerned only when none is around and “beg” for favour while systematically reminding the authority of their [Doubting Thomas’] contribution to the system. Every now and then they would indulge in typical “Ego appeasement” of the authority by chosen words “You know it best; I need not apprise you of anything”. This is a Shakespearean style of outwitting us. My contention is, if the authority does not require being apprised, then why this very exercise except to be sure that ‘our case has been presented’.  An interesting part of their behaviour is to ensure that none except the authority knows of this interaction; therefore they would hurriedly vacate the scene with a faithful murmur “see you later”. Much to their chagrin, at least a couple of persons doubt the Doubting Thomas and raise nagging questions with that individual. Always the doubting Thomas has a stock reply “I will tell you later”. In the process the person effectively inflates the ego of such inquisitive people. Each of them feels [s] he has a special niche in the mind of the doubting Thomas. If they individually meet “DT” later, each one gets a different idea of totally unconnected things. On a second reference DT tends to forget what [s] he told whom and a new cat is out of the bag. All DTs have the common syndrome of very high self esteem and an earnest belief that the system has not accorded them the due recognition. Much of this is a mere notion and the DTs do not dare raise their claims in any legitimate forum. Another hall mark of all DTs is their uniform attitude of not accepting responsibility while craving for recognition.  What generally works to the advantage of DTs is the common acceptance of their polite utterances with their agenda hidden deep underneath. Their agenda is to win the widest appreciation of appeal while enjoying the status of the most acceptable. By their very nature, they are not outspoken, hesitant to spell decisions and any utterance is soft- worded, carefully drafted to connote humility and cordiality. Strictly speaking, people do not relish unduly soft utterances and do believe that aspirants to authority need to be clear in conviction and honest in implementation. Any one playing soft merely intends “reaching” the top. For them, decision-making is a task of sorts, as they revel in being polite than being purposeful. Therefore DTs can not contribute from positions of authority. With DTs at the helm of affairs, disputes become common place, as they tend to play cordial with every one. An administrator need not be cordial in utterances, but has to be neutral and selfless in the execution of rules. Generally, DTs prefer to be “friendly looking” to all and will certainly run into rough weather as administrators since they can not please every one all the time. The interesting point is, all the appointing authorities like their soft nature as employees, but are hesitant to provide them the positions of authority. Hitherto, I have suggested the shortcomings of DTs. They are simultaneously harmless and useless. It is for others to be alert about the Doubting Thomas of any type lest we should run into confusions. The DTs are afraid of rubbing any one on the wrong side and do not believe in asserting their positions. Have the cake and eat it too is the attitude of DTs, without revealing an iota of this broad agenda. On a promise of “between us”, they share anguish with everyone, stating their “feeling of not-being recognized”.

To continue                                             K.Raman