The fundamental cornerstone of Marxist Dialectical Materialism, a cycle of action and reaction each time bringing a solution of a higher state elucidated by the principle of "Thesis, Antithesis and Synthesis", is often cited by our revolutionaries as the raison d'être of the serial revolution wrenching the heart and soul of this land. Recently this aspect of Marxism was brought to the fore by Hisila Yami in an interview with "Tehelka", a newsmagazine published in India and in an op-ed published by Kantipur. History has proven time and again that this theory is very far removed from reality. The "Thesis" can bring "Antithesis" but the "Synthesis" we want often goes awry. The French Revolutionaries did not expect the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte, an emperor in new garb who wrested dictatorial power for himself in the pretext of liberté, égalité , fraternité . The revolution had devoured its own children and given rise to an emperor! N

A t St. Xavier's Godavari School, the biggest punishment one could possibly get was missing the next monthly movie. We were some of the very few who were privileged to watch Hollywood movies in the Kathmandu of the sixties, courtesy of our Jesuit fathers and their excellent relationship with the American missions in Nepal. Hindi movies reigned supreme in local cinemas and there was no market for English language films, except for a few mega hits once in a while, like Ben Hur , Lawrence of Arabia and The Ten Commandments . When a punishment was meted out for transgressions and we missed a Sunday movie, there was no consolation. One sat in an empty classroom reading, cast away like a leper, while rest of the student body was transfixed by the visual imagery dancing on a large white screen. Yes, I have been there just once but it felt at the time like a lifetime. My first recollections of movies screened on to a white screen was at home. They were often times grainy, black and whi