 In fact, Anand Patwardhan is my colleague. We have been working with Nivara Haq Suraksha Samiti, an organization from 1986, in Mumbai, working with Juki Jopis. We were both together there. I remember that when I came to Ashoka Hotel's lobby, I met Anand Patwardhan there. They told me that today is the 4th day of the function, and we all have banners in our hands. I said, yes, sir. I think Gautam Ghosh was there too. I don't remember the whole story. But we all stood in front of each other. We took all the banners. We were protesting peacefully. HKL Bhagat came to know that he is protesting here. He didn't leave the beach. He came from the back. Why did he come from the back? The photo opportunity was ours, that we were protesting in front of HKL Bhagat. He left. Obviously, our enthusiasm was reduced. I have no idea when this happened. Because the beach was kept in front of me. I was so angry that you didn't allow us to do the right thing. It happened spontaneously. We didn't get any part of it. We thought that we would choose this opportunity. There was nothing like that. Just that we were not allowed to do the right thing. So, the anger that came out of it, that was the moment. When I was thinking about my other side, do you think that the idea of life, or the idea of life comes from the ideology, what do you think is the meaning of that? I think that the environment where I grew up, I have always believed that art should be a part of a social change. Art should be used as an instrument for social change. Obviously, my father was a member of the Communist Party. We lived in a commune until the age of 9, which was called the Red Flag Hall. So, this was completely different from the environment. When you look at the subject, the language was different. The vocabulary was different. But the same thing, the world view, was talking about it, which was saying that the strength of art, we should use that as an instrument for social change. That found resonance with me. During today's times, I feel that the environment is very important to us, that through art, we can discuss with people, we can keep our own views. And in this way, they can go to the whole world. I remember that the protest songs in that time, as a child I used to hear, even today, the same effect on me, they are stuck in my blood. So, there is a direct influence of theatre and a subliminal influence. And that subliminal influence of gender justice, social justice, against fundamentalism, religious fundamentalism, all those things just get into your system. So, for me, I feel I am where I am. Because I was exposed to a certain kind of atmosphere. If I had been born in an industrialist, or in an industrialist hope, maybe I wouldn't be who I am today. No matter how young people are, no matter how young and young are, what kind of atmosphere we create, where this becomes the rule rather than the exception. Mr. Javed, I would also like to ask the same question, that the atmosphere we are talking about, this atmosphere should not be said. The progressive atmosphere that one is talking about, should become the rule. So, for you, a subliminal personality, not just on an individual level, but the idea, we often say, that a subliminal is not just a person, he is a thought. What is the meaning of that, of his life, of his death? You are absolutely right, that a subliminal is not a person, he is a thought maker. And that is why, without meeting him, I could never meet him. I am very close to him. And what Shyamana just mentioned, this happened in the 30s, in the 36s, there was a very big conference in Lucknow, which was presided by Monshi Premchand. And he was given a message, by Rabindranath Tagore. In that, there were all the languages of India, writers, poets, it was a movement of all the languages of India, which is known as the Progressive Writers Movement. And there, this was discussed on a very conscious level, and this resolution was passed, that our pen, our writing, on one side, is the British government, it should be against it, for a religious freedom. And on the other side, the inequality, the injustice, with the weak, with the farmers, with the workers, with the women, it should be against it. So, many writers took this bill out, and did the same. The family I belong to, on either mother or father's side, these were the people, on one side, Majaz, on the other side, Jatsar, they were both fathers, they were both part of the Progressive Movement. So, their friends were also the same people, whether they were the writers, or the writers, or the writers, or the writers. So, it happened that this literature, we have read since childhood, this is Jana, and in the school college as well, this was my mind, I became friends with those people, who used to think this way, to talk to them. So, this, Sabdar, he was a progressive writer, and a worker, his whole work, is very important. So, sometimes, we have a traditional literature, which came from feudal era, which came, from other times, its language, in it, the aesthetic feudal period, stays in it. Its expression, it can reach somewhere, to some extent, to some extent, to other people. So, somewhere, this too, despite all the efforts, in the writers, this might be a handicap, that this, the common man, could not reach his poetry, his stories, but some people, who went ahead with it, they changed their language, they changed their expression. This was the next step, this too, but this is the next step, that when they said, the other things, which are aesthetic, they are still in their place, now we have to talk about what any person can understand, the other aesthetics, will be seen later. So, how did they express the common language, the common way, that you can see it in the good, bad plays. So, this is the same thing, this is not different, this is not against it, this is its natural and logical next step, that what we have learned from our ancestors, how did this reach us all? Okay, but if you allow me to ask a question, which I think is very important for them too, but it seems that when you talk so directly, because you want to reach people, then the common way, you use such an easy language, then you cannot call it an art. How did you decide this generation? How did you decide this generation? Who did you decide this generation? The people who have decided, are they okay? It is necessary that, if I am saying, as much as I have said and you have understood it, and you have no idea about it, then it will not be an art. And then there is a statement about the boarding process. But if you start thinking about it, and you think about it, then it is meaningful, then it is an art. And there are different forms of art. I mean, our idea should not be different. That is wrong. You cannot do a high art. Yes, there are different forms of art. This is also a form, and this form is also a very effective form. And you see, it is being talked about, it is being talked about, it is being talked about, if you have made it a small story, like the artists, who sit on the streets, they do not give a sweet bullet like this. There is medicine in it. If there is sugar, then there is nothing. But there is medicine in it. They have sent the medicine. You must be standing on the street and talking about it. If you had the right of a woman, then there would be very few people. But when you make a small story, people listen to it. There are weeks on absurdity, which are in our traditional values. And then while sleeping, where does it reach? How does it reach? It must be appreciated. It is being talked about in this way. But I have to play the devil's advocate. During today's time, when we talk about street theater, and the technical advances that have happened, or we cannot afford them, or we do not understand its need, I think we should think about it again. Because yesterday when Mala was playing, there were so many things that I could not hear. And I was sure that the people behind could not hear. So why do we not use cordless mics? Not cordless mics. Why? Because with technology on our side, the point is that we need to reach out to as many people as possible. Why is that a consideration that is not brought on the table? Actually it is. Because this kind of questions have always been asked before us. But one distinctive feature of Nukkar Natak is that there were many people yesterday. It was a special occasion. There were many people. But in the name of it, where people live, work, when we play, more than 300-400 audiences do not need this kind of communication. Unfortunately, in our country, for its requirements, the kind of things that we need, we do not get them everywhere. We have done a via media that we did last year, Abhishek Majumdar directed for us. He does not play Nukkar Natak. We do it in the open. There is also a song in it. It is a good song despite the name of Sabdar. It is a very good song. We have used a limited technology effectively. This is also very important that many Nukkar Natak groups cannot do that you include other artists in your work so that they can learn from you. But you have to enrich your work. This is definitely a big question in front of us. If there are some things that are not free of technology, then you do not know which Nukkar Natak group can do this. You have to push towards it. No, I am not doing it differently. I am going ahead. I do not have the permission to do it. But the question is whether Nukkar Natak is free of technology or not? No, no. Where is the freedom? No, no. Something happens everywhere. Let me tell you. Sir, this is against our principles. This is a good drama that has reached the audience. So, if you run on a battery, you do not need electricity. Yes, we have used it. If you are speaking and it is not like everyone speaks, then 300 people listen. So, if you have this facility, then it is of no use. No, absolutely not. We have been trying to change it. So, there is Nukkar Natak is not pure if you have used it. The theatre is not pure. Actually, in a lake in Sabdar, there was an article about the enchanted art in which the theatre was on fire. The entire park was there. Auditorium, serics, and lights, and all of that. The theatre is a story. It is a living story between the living people. So, what is the world of it? The world is a good story. Now, this is a good story. You can call it in the auditorium, in the open, but it does not read in the auditorium. So, in Sabdar, it is very clear that there are many Nukkar Nataks who think that we do not act in a good way. We are against Nukkar Natak. We do not act in a bad way. We do not act in a good way. We do not act in a bad way. We do not act in a good way. We do not act in a good way. That is correct. That is correct. So, in Sabdar, it is written and the way they did it, and the positions they have taken through their books, through their Nukkar Nataks, they have a chronicle of this book. So, if I come to you that in this book you have not read it then it is available outside. You can take it. The book is about Sabdar's life and his death, but not only about them. There are more than one protagonists in the book. The story begins with Sabdar, but then it is in the center of the book. And in the book, which is a part of the story, I wanted to know what is the Nukkar Natak or what is the politics and the drama. This is said in Sabdar and in today's time to bring all these things back to the public domain through a book. So, in the 70s and 80s and in the trade union what were the relations between them. There was not a single incident. So, there are all those books in the book. I think that the book is very small but its canvas is very big. There are many things in it that are being talked about and it is a matter of knowledge. So, why do you think that it is important to talk about these histories at this moment. Progressive. Why is it important to read and write about these histories and to know them? I think that what we are living in and what is happening to us is a very scary face that is in front of us. If you are a little familiar type of person then there will be a lot of trolls about your mother and sister that will happen. There will be a lot of threats and then there will be a lot of people. So, in such a situation where it is important to put a restriction on thinking I think that we formally say that this country is a democracy. We are in a democracy. Is democracy today? There are no elections. But what does democracy mean? Democracy means that after every 5 years there will be an election and the one with the most wealth will be successful and the one with the most sweets will be successful. So, I think when we talk about democracy then democracy is something that is a part of life and not just about the elections but also about politics. This is our relation of every day in our society and what we talk about and if there is no democracy then what is democracy? Democracy every day we have to fight and this fight is not done in Parliament or Assembly. It is done there. But on the streets and not only on the streets there is a school a college a house a kitchen a bedroom democracy is a important thing and this is how democracy is made I think in such a environment when today a young generation say that India is the youngest country in all countries the youngest country is said to be our country so among these people this thought I think that democracy is only about what is democracy here about the road about our homes about our schools and colleges and here the people who have fought for democracy they have a government and not just government government is a kind of symbol and in the life of government there is a culture a century of life and about the century of life it was not possible to write from a book but I have tried to write as a sign and all the members and all these people have been a part of it I have tried to write about those members in 1986 in Delhi city you cannot think in Delhi city there was a march of committee and communal harmony 30,000 people would march in old Delhi there was a brochure when I was researching I was surprised by thinking that I was a student at that time I saw that brochure I was not surprised today I am surprised that the messages that were in brochure the greetings that were in India the Chief Justice of Supreme Court Jamia Melia Islamia Jawaharlal Navy University and Delhi University the greetings that this work is going on today I cannot think today how many of us have come from and I think about that march how it happened that 30,000 people would march on the streets only 70,000 people would organize it how it happened 70,000 people when the march was held in 1989 we had to march on the streets till gate we had to march on the streets we had to march on the streets why did this happen we had to leave it on a head or we had to say that it was a goon and it attacked us but who was this goon doing it for which movement which movement was trying to suppress which movement was trying to suppress so if you don't understand 1988's art and what is the impact on the industrial environment of that art you don't understand then you understand that the murder of the Chief Justice was only an isolated incident so I think what I have tried to do is to bring all these stories together and the life of the Chief Justice and this is my last point really that what I have seen and what I have been talking to Mala what I have to know is that a huge part of the life of the Chief Justice is to work every single day which nobody can see but the important things are very important which are not standing idle I would like to tell you that the space we are sitting and the way we are talking it is not possible to talk about this era I mean the question and the answer and the way we are talking about it and Janam has seen a era which was in 1975 and the work he had told so I would like to know what was the thought that the era which was growing rapidly that the progress of the Soviet movement and one is that part and the other is that the era of Daman and the way we are looking at the attack on the art what is the difference or is Daman the difference is of course there is a difference the era of 1975 the era of emergency there is a difference there is a difference in every aspect in my opinion during the emergency what happened was it was the same thing that it was suppressed but it was not suppressed that is why it was obviously its protest and it was because the specific thing of Janan Atmanj was that we were a very young group and many of our people went bankrupt at that time when the emergency was declared in Delhi so we actually didn't do anything during the emergency except we used to meet in between but during that time we used to think that we have to do something what we should do that was the thing but I think whenever Daman happened and more than once in 1992 in 2002 when Babri Masjid was going away we had heard in radio that we were having a meeting and we virtually tried to make an overnight drama we have to do something and we did I said we had to do something and we have to do something creatively and through theater because we are the people of theater giving statements going to solidarity march that is the thing but through drama we have to keep something and I think now not only us but other artists so many people come on the streets and in their art not only during the specific Daman but in front of that the same question is raised in the drama that you in the name of nationalism or in the name of identity the things that are raised how much we are seeing in the drama so I think somewhere the political thought is at least spread among the artists there was a time in the 40s there was a progressive movement in Uphan because in front of us the British government the full legacy of Ipta somewhere there was a Tutan or Bikrao but now I think whether it is a struggle but there are a lot of people who are protesting who are creatively protesting but I want to ask a question to all the people who are protesting do we suggest because on us it seems like they come with a flag for everything and say what is wrong what is wrong when you for instance if you are talking about Narmada if you are talking about Andulan so how many people have come to know about that and Narmada and Andulan you will have to stick to that only protest by itself is not going to use whatever, however flawed you have a solution listen to it is it about staying with the problem or is it about solving the problem we have to be with the solution not with the problem absolutely we have to solve the problem and that is why we have to say what is wrong and where the government has been there is a creative response in Kerala the local democracy they have prepared that it is right that if there is a short history a novelist he will tell that in society this is going on in short history this is not justice it is with justice or with a woman or with a minority what is the solution social structure social economic structure how to change it is not necessary to understand it and it is not necessary to tell it is enough to point out let's see who can do this so every time the solution is so difficult and it is not possible we know that disparity is increasing how to reduce this disparity you will not be able to understand it is not a poet it is an economist we can sensitize people from their place from their novel like this but the second thing is equally important what is our story that whatever we believe we make it a religion whether it is left or right or center or up or down in that slowly any kind of wisdom any kind of philosophy any kind of code of conduct gradually becomes our caricature in that something within progressive movement when you analyze it with magnifying glass then you will know in progressive movement there are some rightists and some leftists what are these rightists these rightists are fanatic about progressive movement what do you mean you are writing a word you know you are writing a word he is a poet he wants one day he will write one or two he will not leave he has started business in child labor what was in this movement how did you say this is a reactionary thought then slowly gradually it starts to shake in that it goes on and on like I said you do not work you put on a mic so this is a problem so there should not be a religiosity in this keep it open and do not close the door especially the development and the environment these are two different schools and one of them is in the figure of pressing what is wrong the fact is that you need both things so in this you should have this flexibility to understand how the development is and how the environment is and how to work together there are many things which become either or other they should not be either or other this is also something and this is also something see how these two can be together but our natural perhaps instinct especially the causes these are very dangerous there is no cause there is an opportunity to get a cut in that cause we should be saved from it means you have an example I do not want to take the name of the group someone was doing very good job so they wanted to have a big conference in that city from different parts of the country they called for a delegation now a serious matter has been decided and how it happened and we have limited the fact of trust a rich friend a very rich businessman I met him I mentioned that this is such a thing and the problem we are facing is that he has a very good cause people are getting paid for very good work so once you do a job I will limit them I will give money at least if I don't do this then I will help a good job now he is a businessman so he has a 5 star hotel I I will tell you where he is in the 5 star hotel all the delegations come and arrange for everyone and he said all our people and all the people who were there in the 5 star hotel you will not be able to do anything now this means this is a contract but it also symbolizes leave the symbols one is the need to wash it what happens in the 5 star hotel what happens except that the tea is 200 rupees what else the rest is tea it will be a waste eat more or the table will be fine take care of yourself a person will not be able to do anything take care of yourself take care of yourself now this is a rule the fear is at what point you start getting co-opted it is on us no but it becomes keep it on your own but that is why I think there should be a top brass in any organization because they can always save us we know that that is the ideal which is silly even to expect but you know that it will not co-opt and if you don't compromise then you should have a consciousness I think it is a little different but we have to co-opt we also have to I want to say it very well I think it is for a lot of people it seems that we will not be able to think then keep it on your own look you will not understand what to do what to do what to do we have to keep it on our own otherwise we will have to make a wrong decision and there was a house its name was really pattern it was a bank and rubber so it was about 40-50 banks were looting in the 40s so they asked why do you loot a bank they asked why do you loot a bank they said so so now you need money for every job where will you get this money what happens people are like us but some work has been done economically they did not have the courage to work with the principles they did not work with the principles but somewhere in their conscience that we are doing this now they want to reduce the weight of their conscience if they are hungry then why are you refusing why are you doing this what happened to you only one thing like you do not eat tobacco you know I have refused no but that is why you need established that I did not take I will not do it I will not do it I will not go to the head so it is not no holds barred no holds barred you will not do it but as far as possible use people for yourself do not be afraid I have a question I have money I do not have money I do not have money the question is the organization the organization has called the delegation the question is the question is if you do not work then you will be in a loss I have a small response I have only one the question you are asking if we go somewhere and someone gives us a good food then we will eat they are helping us if we eat there is a 5 star but where you started that there should not be a cutter now tell you an example I will not take your name I am an activist there was a meeting on the first or second floor there was a mall there was a meeting there was a meeting I was not coming I was not in the mall I was not in the mall now what is this I am not in the mall I am not in the mall I am not in the mall what people think what people look up to you what people think then slowly you will send that girl to the burqa what people think what people think but this is a real incident that she said I am not in the mall you have kept the meeting you will have to go through the mall I cannot come I think this is not a cutter it is a little stupidity a cutter is stupidity that is true but because of that I only know despite all this you are right we get ideological we get ideological we get ideological but somewhere I think what we believe what we believe we believe in what we believe what we believe I am talking about a better world but what I believe is with someone else or in their work or in our creative output I think there is a an image of the artists of these things the nature of the art whatever their point of view left or right is not the point clarity and honesty is important that is the belief and we believe in a better world the way we are we all believe in it this is our information it is not mentioned in the name it is good progressive they used to talk about their wife and in their poetry they used to talk about their wife they used to talk about their wife and they used to talk about their wife they don't understand now this kind of speech you are talking about yourself you are talking about yourself you are talking about yourself yes yes yes, yes, yes we believe in it we believe in it we believe in consciousness if we read the news of the work Because you have to have your inroads in the society. Wherever your inroads are, wherever your contacts are, you will have them. So there will be nothing left. So in this we need different kinds of people. Different kinds of people. Who is with you, who is with you, who is with you, who is with you, who is with you, who is with you, who is with you. You need every person. And who is with you, who has given us this hotel, he was a self-made man. Now why did he spend this money? What was the need for him? He didn't even come to that meeting. He didn't even meet anyone. His man came and paid the bill. What was the reason for him doing this? He didn't want me to be happy. He didn't want me to be happy. He didn't want me to be pleased with his work. What was the need for him to do this work? It has decreased. You will meet such people in the bureaucracy, in the police, in the hospitals, in the doctors, who are living their lives but somewhere they have a corner that they think that this is the right person. So he helped you. Now you are ready and you are going to be rich. So he came to you. Now you are ready and you are going to be rich. So these people, where we have taken so many principles, we are not going to touch this. We will touch everyone as long as it is for us. I am very much tired of this. If we leave everyone, then we will not be like ourselves. Then what will happen? My father used to say that I will take money from the government and I will talk against the government. We have created a studio and we are fundraising. The idea that we should do a circus theatre festival in Mumbai whose idea came from Shwana Ji. We were very clear that we will not take the sponsorship from anyone. But we did the cultural fund because it is available for everyone. And apart from that, we have some friends who are from the outdoor publicity company. It is not an MNC. They helped us for so many years. So that is a kind of consciousness. I think there is that negotiation and that is also necessary. But this is right. It is not a cut. It is a cut. So Shwana Ji told me that she will take money from the government and I can talk against her. But if we look at the current situation, the government who is working with money from the government is making a lot of mistakes. It seems to me that they are making a lot of mistakes. You have come in front of the car. The government gives money to the same governments who are doing such things. Both of them are doing such things. No doubt. They will finance them. Those were different times. How can we deal with this? I am from a very rural area. My work is like that. I get so frustrated looking at things that the government is making mistakes. Only mistakes. So it is good. Save the daughter, teach the daughter. And on the other hand, the situation on the ground is very bad. That frustration means a lot. I think it is very important to draw the line. How will the money be used? So there should be certain no-negotiables. And then some should be with discussion. One can go through. I am not a company because I am on mic. I don't want to take the line. Very, very, very big company. Which is very philanthropic. But of course, they have a thought. They are thinking about what to do. So the big NGOs should take money from them. So there was a very strong, strong faction that said that they should not take it. Because ultimately, what Mar... Triza, please tell us. I wrote a poem. Yes, exactly. The title was Madhav Triza. It is in Tafesh. Yes. The good thing is that I am not in Tafesh. If I had been in Tafesh, I wouldn't have been in the camera. Madhav Triza, I don't deny your courage. The courage is great. Know how dry your lips and eyes are. Know how tired your body is and your wounds are. On footpaths, on the wrong path, old man. In the garbage house, a piece of bread is found, naked children. They get the courage to live in your shadow. Know how broken a helpless person is. Know how helpless a helpless person is. They get the courage to live in your shadow. They get the punishment of their own being. They get the punishment of their own being. This is not the right thing to do. This is the right thing to do. Your depth, touch, Christ, and your karma is a sea which has no power. Hey, Madhav Triza, I don't deny your courage. I am standing alone. I am just going to live for my own sake. I am asking you this question. Why didn't you ask this? Who changed these changes? Why didn't you ask this? What power does the human being have to take away the rights to live? Why don't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Who took away the bread from these hungry people? The economic system? Speaking of you, you are cutting off the front of the hungry people. Why didn't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Why didn't you ask this? Why are you asking for charity? Why is it like this? One, you are hurt from the unknown. The other, you are not hurt from the oppressor. Yes, yes, yes. But the truth is, what should I ask you? If I ask you, you will be responsible for me too. The one whom I regret. It is better if I remain quiet. And if I have to say something, then I will say this only. I am Arteza. I do not wish for your blessings. I have always thought that our generation has never met Sabdar. We used to be friends in the picture. We have seen Sabdar in our pictures. So I always think that if Sabdar was here, what would he be thinking? What would he be asking? Maybe he is asking something else. Maybe he is asking something else about his picture. Absolutely. Definitely. Can you imagine what he is asking? So one more question, if I have time. But I would like to do it from the book itself. When we talk about Sabdar, what Sabdar used to think in the last 4-5 hours, what he used to think about these things, and what he did with them. When we read the book, as I said at the beginning, there is a pattern in it. So I wanted to know that when he was writing the book, the role of an insider, outsider and outsider, because it is not just biography. It is not written from the book. It has been lived for a long time. You can read it yourself. So if you want to talk about the writing, please tell us a little about the writing. The positionality that we are talking about. In scholarly terms. I can't answer scholarly questions. No. I would like to say that the first thing I thought about this book was about 25 years ago. At that time, I tried very hard to get it right. But I didn't see it in Malak. Even when I interviewed Malak, he understood it very well. After that, there was a lot of time. I kept thinking that I have to write this book. But overall, I couldn't get the voice of it. Last year, it was a different thing. Last year, it was a different thing. This jacket, this sweater, this is my uniform of 1, 2 and 3 Janmari. This jacket or sweater, that day, I wore it. You wore it earlier? Yes, I wore it. So you are still in doubt? I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. I wish. Man, you are so big. You are only short. His zip is not even comfortable. Okay. Anyway, you had your demoralized dress already. Okay. So last year, actually, when I was removing my coverage from 1 Janmari, I had to leave early. We leave at 6.30 at night. When I was taking it out, I saw this jacket and sweater, and I said, this jacket and sweater have become a part of my diet. And till the time I don't get tired, till the time I don't get finished, I remember that I thought that I am a part of this story. And why am I going through this? Every time I tried to write it, I made it like a traditional biography. And then I realized that this is not possible. Because I can't write. That is not possible for me. It is impossible to write about the subject. So writing about the subject, I have to talk about myself. It was inevitable. It was necessary. I had to do it. And that is why this story... The people who read this book, I don't want to talk about my own book, but just to say that I have written a real-life story. And my ambition is that people who don't read books and who don't read a lot of books, they can read this book. That is why when I wrote in English, the language was very simple. And it was written like a novel. And like a plot in a novel, there is a plot in it. And that plot is the life of the subject. And in that plot, there is a young man who started from somewhere, reached a place, then he had problems, he had difficulties in crossing those difficulties. He saw them, he crossed them. And when there was a time when he was ready to make a big move, it was at that time. So this is a very dramatic story in itself. And it is almost like a novel. And the characters in it, there are many of them. Arun, Vijay Kalyay, Malatukhach, he is very central in that, and I am also. So this was not an option for me. I had to write this. I had to write it like a story. I had to write it like a novel because I want my book to be read by young people. And I had to write it in a language that would communicate to young people. 20, 22 years old, 18, 20 years old, the young man, after opening his book and reading the first page, he did not feel that this was a very heavy life that he did not have. So there is no theory in this book. Everyone has used it somewhere. But this is not the story that I have told. This is what I am trying to tell. And before that, I would like to tell you that the young man sitting here, his translation is so beautiful in Hindi. And I know Hindi very well. I know that it is a very deep appreciation that there are many parts of that book that are more famous in Hindi than in English. So this is why I would like to tell the friends here who know Hindi, that I would like to tell them that they will also take a lot of time in Hindi. The money is also given in the name of God. What is the meaning of that? There is no meaning. Yes, there is no meaning at all. I would like to tell the young man to listen to the conversation. He has a wonderful experience that I have been with him for the past 2-3 years. He does not read any text for the first time. No matter how tough he is, he keeps his eyes in front of him and the way he speaks, he keeps speaking. Which is really, really amazing. This is why. Thank you. I would also like to ask you one thing. You said that I could not write. I have not thought about it. You could not even write before this. I have not read your book, but I know a little about writing. Writing is a journalist and writing is a difference. There is an incident today and a journalist will publish it in the newspaper and it will be published. But when it comes to writing, there are two conditions. One is that you need a distance that comes with time. And the other is that despite the distance, you do not have an ambivalent quote. When you are very close to the picture, you do not see the distance. You will have to go away. You are so close to the picture that you can see it like a story. Now you have come out of it. Otherwise, you were a character. How do you see the whole story? When you come out, there is a danger in it that the relationship is broken and the emotional connection is not connected. The emotional connection remains the same and is distanced. A man can only write. He cannot write before that.