I cried but it was late

I didn't cry on my wedding day.. I didn't, not during getting ready, not during walking to the stage, not during jaimala, not during phere, not during kanyadaan and not during vidaai. I didn't. What to do ? But I cried as soon as I sat inside the vidaai car, as soon as all the crying faces were behind me, I broke down but that is not recorded in the wedding video. It was considered late and I am now termed as an unemotional person for the rest of my life. I can't go back to them and tell them that I did cry for them!! And I cried even more on the first Diwali after marriage, when I was not home with my parents. I think that's when it actually hit me that I have a changed identity and that I have actually changed homes. But I can't go back to them and tell them that I did cry!!

Can the classical be contemporary ? [dance]

Let me start with the definition of classical, which says "representing an exemplary standard within a traditional and long-established form or style". The words 'traditional' and 'long-established' stare at me now because they are actually the antonyms of contemporary. But the question we have here is that can this traditional and long-established classical dance be contemporary. I would like to argue, yes, it can be.

People argue that the structure of a classical dance doesn't give space for a contemporary movement. What I think is that the hand gestures or the feet movements or the exercises are only the building blocks or the tools in the hands of the choreographer, what she wants to make out of them is limitless. If I give a flat wooden plank and 4 wooden sticks to a carpenter, it is not necessary that one has to make a table out of it, though that may be the most intuitive object. Similarly, a choreographer doesn't need to follow a pattern or fall into the tradition templates of stories that are conventionally presented, say Radha-Krishna, Shiva, etc.

What I'm trying to say here is that the onus of making a piece contemporary or not is on the choreographer, and not on the form she is following. I believe if your thought process behind the piece is modern, the output will definitely come out to be contemporary. For example, in Indian classical, if you want to show love between Radha and Krishna or you want to praise Lord Shiva or you want to show a woman craving for her lover, first of all you need to ask yourself, are these stories new-age ? Will today's woman, who earns, who takes decisions, who is exposed to world affairs, and who maybe doesn't even believe in love or God, relate to a woman on stage who is only concerned with love and her lover? The same form will become contemporary if you chose to show how a woman is fighting between her career and family or how people are stuck up in a rat-race or some present-day phenomenon.

And even if one wants to or is forced to show the stories of established characters, it can still be treated in a very modern way. A Radha-Krishna piece can be choreographed to show normal human emotions rather than giving them a larger than life treatment. If they love and fight like a contemporary couple, the piece will never look outdated. An excellent example is the recently released Siva Trilogy by Amish Tripathi. All the three books have a freshness and they actually define the latest trend in writing, though the protagonist is Lord Shiva.

Hence my point is that if a choreographer wants to make a piece which looks fresh and appeals to a contemporary audience, the form should never come in their way.

The second point I want to make is whether classical dance can be contemporary dance itself. Till now I was arguing that classical dance can be presented in a modern way but now I am looking at whether classical dance can itself be modern. Now what exactly is contemporary dance ? Actually there is no definition. It is a representation of what we think in the present time and therefore with time, the definition also keeps changing and never stagnates. I believe, yes,classical dance can be contemporary dance if it is allowed to be. More often than not, the pioneers of classical dance hold onto the structure or the so called rules so tightly that even if one small convention is not followed, they get offended and refuse to call it classical at all. But for me, breaking a few 'rules' to make the classical look fresher is 'contemporizing' the classical dance and not really breaking it.

I think we should believe in evolution and allow a classical dance form to renovate itself. After all, everything needs change. In fact, the classical form Bharatanatyam underwent a complete makeover by Rukmini Devi during the British rule when it was being considered sexual and inappropriate. Wikipedia says "Soon she changed the very face of the dance, by introducing musical instruments, like violin, set and lighting design elements, and innovative costumes, and jewellery inspired by the temple sculpture". What she did was exactly that, modernising the dance form so that it suits the present time so that it is accepted and doesn't become extinct. If changes can be done to save a dance form from getting extinct, changes can definitely be done to retain a dance form and keep it new-age.

Of course critics would argue that the purity of the respective form has been destroyed, but at the same time, it can be seen as decorating the form with new ornaments and renovating it. My point is that it can be done, it should be done and it should be seen as a healthy progression to keep the dance form alive.

Impact of British Rule on Indian Arts

Classical Dance: Historically in Indian states, classical dances were those dances that were performed either in the temples according to religious rituals or in royal courts accompanied by classical music. The advent of British rule brought a decline to all forms of classical dance as they were considered overtly seductive and unwholesome. A bill was passed against temple dancing and cultural oppression took place. Let me talk in detail about a few of these dance forms and what happened to them.

In South India, Bharathanatyam (then called Dasi Attam) was performed in temples by Devadasis who were supported by their admirers and they in return received sexual benefits. The British could not understand this system and started disregarding Devadasis as prostitutes. They also found the moves very erotic and therefore banned the temple dance. As the dance form was dying, some people felt strongly about it and took measures to revive Bharathanatyam. Rukmini Devi is considered to be the most important revivalist of this dance. She brought in many modifications like removal of sringaar elements, introducing musical instruments and brining in innovative costumes. In 1936, she established Kalakshetra, a cultural academy dedicated to the preservation of Bharathanatyam.

In North India, Kathak was performed by story-tellers in temples as well as in courts to please the Nawabs. Again the Victorians publicly announced that the art form was overtly vulgar (although it is said that they privately indulged in court room dancing) and termed it as 'nautch', which meant 'dance performed by a girl to seduce a man to obedience'. It was a period of hardship for the art-form as it was looked down upon and considered a means of livelihood for women of very low status in society. It was revived by the Maharaj family consisting of Birju Maharaj, Shambhu Maharaj etc and its popularity has been regained and spread.

Something similar happened in Eastern part of the country with Manipuri and Odissi dance forms. In 1891, Manipur was annexed by the British. Manipuri dance was considered old-fashioned and dancing itself was frowned upon and regarded as immoral. Only the temple of Govindji at Imphal was able to sustain this dance tradition. Manipuri was mostly revived by efforts of Rabindranath Tagore, especially when he included it in his programme of study at Shantiniketan. The Maharis (Odissi temple dancers) were associated with being prostitutes of the kings and they were disrespected and suppressed under British rule. 

Martial Arts: It is not surprising that all Indian martial art forms and practice of warfare were suppressed during British rule as the British wanted to prevent rebellion and did not want their colony to be strong. British troops were well trained to use with explosive and guns, but they were lacking the physical combat skills. This fear lead them to impose restrictions on Indian martial arts. Most of the martial arts during this time had to be practiced in secret in rural areas.

Paika Akhada is an Orissa based martial art form. In March 1817, Paika rebellion happened against the British rule in which the British commander was killed. When the rebellion came to an end, the colonists completely stamped out the martial practices of Odisha. Today, Paika Akhada has been preserved in the form of a dance meant purely for performance, but recent government efforts aim to revive the art in its original martial form.

South Asian martial arts also underwent a period of decline after the full establishment of British colonial rule in the 19th century.More European modes of organizing kings, armies and governmental institutions, and the increasing use of firearms, gradually removed the need for traditional combat training. The British colonial government banned Kalaripayatu in 1804 in response to a series of revolts. Silambam was also banned and became more common in the Malay Peninsula than its native Tamil Nadu. But traditional fighting systems persisted, sometimes even under the patronage of enthusiastic British spectators who tended to remark on the violence of native boxing and the acrobatic movements characteristic of South Asian fighting styles. 

In 1920s, the resurgence of public interest in Kalaripayat began as part of a wave of rediscovery of the traditional arts throughout south India which characterised the growing reaction against British colonial rule. During the following three decades, other regional styles were subsequently revived such as Silambam in Tamil Nadu, Thang-ta in Manipur and Paika Akhada in Orissa.

Indian Contemporary Dance: We have already seen how all classical art forms were being suppressed by Britishers. Artists and musicians were struggling to maintain their position. The environment was changing and British cultural influence was spreading over the country. There were constant debates over India’s future identity and culture. Cultural groups were being formed to preserve the Indian traditions in dance and music. People who believed the essence of Indian culture could be found in its ancient traditions, were looking to the past for the “real” definition of national culture and identity. One such example is the Bengali elite group formed in Eastern India during the mid-19th century. They created new forms of dance that asserted India's cultural difference from the British. These new forms emphasised India's spiritual domain bearing the marks of cultural identity.

On the other hand was a dancer Uday Shankar who was exposed to Indian classical forms when he was young but he also learnt ballet and Western techniques during his stay in Europe from 1918 to 1927. When he came back to India, India was nearing the end of its transition from a British colony to a newly independent nation. The cultural environment was that I explained above. Uday Shankar, however, proposed that his invented style and approach of art defined India’s new culture instead. His style brought together a variety of different traditions that corresponded to the variety of cultures that the Indian nation had united for the first time. He thought, perhaps idealistically, that a new nation should have a new culture.

Although now he is recognised as Father of Modern Dance in India, at that time he was rejected. People could not accept the incorporation of colonial influences on Indian dances. He died a broken man and was soon forgotten. Therefore I would like to conclude that people at the time of British rule were not ready to accept the Indian contemporary form but the seeds were actually sown during that period itself. Because of the mixing of cultures, more and more people were experimenting with the fusion of Indian dances with Western elements and eventually this term 'Indian contemporary dance' came into being.

Yoga: Yoga is the collection of physical, mental and spiritual practices which originated in ancient India with a view to attain moksha or nirvana. Like other topics of Indian philosophy, yoga also came to the attention of the Westerners when India was under colonial rule. Initially, the British associated yogis (yoga practitioners) with Tantrics and militants. The yogis became objects of morbid fascination for European tourists. A major transformation of the concept of yogi occurred when Swami Vivekananda (1863-1902) sanitised the term yoga and popularised it as a positive spiritual export. At the same time, the promotion of India as an idealised spiritual centre started because colonialism brought a lot of Europeans to India and they slowly started believing in yoga's practical and scientific benefits in terms of health and well-being. There was deep collaboration between Indians and Europeans and what came out of it is 'modern yoga' which is what we today call yoga. 

Traditionally, Yoga was a complete system, of which the postures were a small part. The entire purpose of Yoga was spiritual in nature. In modern times, the postures have become the most important and defining aspect of yoga. People believe that the word "Yoga" refers to Asanas, and that the goal of these is physical fitness.

What is dance and what is not dance

Dance, as defined by the Oxford Dictionary, is "to move rhythmically to music, typically following a set sequence of steps". This means if I open and close my mouth, that is dance. If I clap my hands, that is dance, if I nod my head that is dance, if I walk that is dance. Umm... really ? What if I feel dead bored while doing these movements ? This definition does not definitely capture the 'art' in dance. So we'll have to look further. Where do we start ? Maybe we need to look at the history of dance to know how dance started and how it evolved over time to actually understand what exactly is dance.

Archeology delivers traces of dance from prehistoric times starting from 3300 BC. Movements were done for celebration and social interaction in many civilisations. Movements were also used as a method of healing in cultures like Brazilian rainforest to the Kalahari Desert. Movements were also performed in order to tell myths and passing on stories down from generation to generation before the written languages came into production. These movements were called dance but the definition was still fuzzy until 15th and 16th centuries when classical dances came into picture in India and Europe. At that time it became easier to define what is dance and what is not dance. In the West, dance was almost synonymous with classical ballet. In fact the word 'ballet' comes from the Greek word 'ballizo', which means 'to dance, to jump about'. In India, the scene was very different. During the reign of Mughals, dance was only performed in the courtrooms and the status of dance fell down to 'nautch', an unethical sensuous thing of courtesans and later during British rule, it was linked with prostitution and being overtly sexual.

Then times changd and early 20th century brought a big change to the definition of dance. There was an explosion of new thinking and exploration and artists began to appreciate the qualities of the individual, the expression and the emotions. Modern dance began to grow and there was a lot of freedom in what people considered art of movement. Isadora Duncan was among the first artists who challenged the rigid ballet technique and started moving away towards what she perceived as natural movement. To restore dance to a high art form instead of entertainment, she sought the connection between emotions and movement: “I spent long days and nights in the studio seeking that dance which might be the divine expression of the human spirit through the medium of the body’s movement.” [My Life, p. 75]. Each of the modern artists in their own way rebelled against the superficiality of classical ballet and the lack of creativity in show-dancing. They simplified stage decor, costumes (feet was bared) and all movements were inspired by freedom of expression rather than a set technique. This really expanded the range of dance but at the same time made it more complicated to define what is dance and what is not dance. The line had started becoming thinner.

So can we say that classical and modern dances put together is dance ? Actually not. Because parallel to these Western dances, there is another culture of dance termed as 'ethnic dance' or folk dance. As the black people were not allowed to be part of ballet groups, they created tap and jazz dancing which is influenced by African folk dances. Unlike ballet, they stress on parallel feet, jerky movements, hip-movements, isolations and sharp transitions in contrast of the softness in ballet. This not only challenged the definition of dance but also broadened it. In fact in 1935, a young Englishman Geoffrey Gorer, travelled through these parts and noted that "It is very difficult for Europeans to understand the place dancing takes in Negro lives. They dance for joy and they dance for grief; they dance for love and hate; they dance for prosperity and to avert calamity; they dance for religion and to pass the time." Similarity in Indian Hindus the dance forms like Kathakali were inspired by a completely different school of thought which was to please the God. The dancers wore elaborate costumes, masks, often their face was painted to give effect of super humans and interpreters of Gods. Under the Muslim religion only one sect , the Sufis, followed a dance rite as a form of worship. The monks would dress in long white robes and high conical hats and slowly revolve with their right hand extended and left palm facing downwards. In Japan, there is masked lion dance, Chinese like the opera, in Spain, dance includes fiery tamping of high heels, the swirl of ruffled skirts and the chatter of castanets. And this goes on for every country, religion, race. Dance can actually speak for an entire community.

This further complicates the question as to what is dance ? Can we say that the various classical forms, modern dance and all the folk dances across the world put together is 'dance' ? And if that's true can we say that everything else is not dance ? Not really. Because in doing so we are stopping the further evolution of dance and we are forgetting that there is something common in all these movement forms that actually make them to be called as dance. That is the pulse we need to find. Is it just the rhythmic movement or is it something to do with sequence of steps or is it the musicality ? Lets take an example: If I am doing some physiotherapy exercise of say, bending my leg (with some music in the background), some people may argue that this should be called dance because it is a sequence of steps being performed musically. But if somebody asks me what am I doing, I would say "I am doing this exercise", and not that "I am dancing" even though I'm making rhythmic movements with my body. So the difference lies in my intention, in my thinking, in the way I feel when I do this movement. Looks like it is dance when the dancer 'intends' to dance and knows that he or she is dancing and gets a certain artistic satisfaction from it. The movement really does not matter and neither does the music or rhythm. Sometimes I can dance just by using facial expressions and not move at all. 

Well, then where are we ? Should we just leave it at 'anything can be dance' ? This brings us to the question of what is not dance. Just like 'beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder', dance also lies in the eyes of the beholder. Just like 'what is dance' depends on how I feel when I am doing the dance, 'what is not dance' depends how a person feels when they see a piece and how well it connects with their emotions. Simplistically, we can say that it should be aesthetically appealing but then one can argue that the artist's prime motivation need not be the pursuit of the aesthetic. This is an endless debate with high levels of subjectivity. What is dance for me may not be dance for you and so on. It all depends on one's experiences, values and sensibility.

Summary wise, I can say that the definition of dance has come a long way from the prehistoric movements done for communication, to rigid classical techniques performed in courtrooms and temples, to modern dance inspired by freedom of expression and natural movement, to folk dances where movements are inspired by local culture and traditions. The definition is almost fluid and it would be interesting to see where it goes next and what all it encapsulates. But at any single given time, dance is the 'art of movement' and the debate will continue as to what level of aesthetic satisfaction, if any, is required for a movement to be termed as 'dance'.

New Beginning

Last day at IIT - ~30 May 2009. My next new beginning was going to be 24th August 2009 with Morgan Stanley. It was a good start, met lot of new people. The grad batch was fun and we had a blast during the 4 month training... Eventually 4 months passed and we were ready for another new beginning.. Work, like real work which affects someone and you get money for it. I started around 3 Jan 2010.

On 9 Dec 2010, I decided to quit. The work was getting monotonous, wasn't getting challenged enough and wanted to move from Mumbai. I quit without knowing what the future holds, ready for a new beginning.

21 March 2011 - joined Google. Another new beginning, very fast paced and challenging. It was like a roller coaster ride, a lot of fun and a bit scary at times. I was enjoying the ride when the clock showed that it was time to get married. I got married on 24 April 2012, all geared up for a new beginning, work wise (I was going to work in London), personally (new family, husband etc), place wise (hoping to get adjusted in the UK).

Landed in London on 11 May 2012. It was awesome. Our house, the job, friends, so many places to visit, I used to feel like Alice in Wonderland. I really love Google, I must say. 

But quite soon, we both realized we don't want to settle here. It is good, it is comfortable, definitely beautiful but very important, it's not our own. We started feeling the need to settle down in the land where we belong.. We're such desis, right ?

Anyways so 12 Sept 2013, that is today is our last day in London and we're flying to India for well, a new beginning :)

So kiss me and smile for me

Tell me that you'll wait for me

Hold me like you'll never let me go

Cause I'm leavin' on a jet plane

Don't know when I'll be back again

Oh babe, I hate to go

What can you do ?

Everybody blames the mothers/fathers/mothers-in-law for female infanticide. I don't blame them because they are not serial killers, their hearts aren't made of stones. They are perfectly normal, everyday people. It is the pain of the future and the fear that they will not be able to give the best of life to their daughter makes them commit this suicide on behalf of their daughters. Are they to be blamed, yes, but only partially. The greater part of the blame goes to the root of this problem, which nobody takes seriously - dowry. If they know that there is no extra burden in raising a girl child than a boy child, a parent/grandparent would never ever take this extreme step..

My humble request to all girls: Please don't marry a beggar in disguise!

What I took to NY stayed in NY

This was my second visit to the US. If I talk about my first visit, well I might be able to write a whole book on how a planned one month internship changed into a 2 day 'touch-and-go' adventure. But that was long back so for now let me talk about the second trip which happened 3 months back.

It was a 9 day trip and the first 5 days passed quite peacefully and I was having a great time. I saw the central park, statue of liberty, wall street, wtc memorial, times square etc etc. Then on the 6th day I decided to visit Macy's for some shopping. One of my colleagues suggested that I should take my passport as there was a discount for International travellers. Sounds good, I thought. So with 200 dollars and 100 pounds and my passport and all my credit cards, I left for Macy's. Ofcourse not knowing that I would be spending 4 hrs in the NY police station that night.

Well I was initially overwhelmed by the vastness of Macy's but finally decided a particular order in which Im going to visit the sections so I dont miss anything. The first section was home n kitchen. I bought some stupid stuff for $74.5 and moved on towards the footwear section. There ofcourse I got excited and was trying out different shoes. Suddenly I realized my shoulder bag was missing. I had kept the bag with the kitchen stuff (that I recently bought) on a sofa. I was walking around the sofa in a new pair of shoes to check how comfortable they were. I could see the shopping bag but not my purse. Still I kept my calm and looked around here and there. I was sure that I had kept the bag on the sofa. I looked under and around the sofa etc but could not find it. Then I informed one of the sales girls and she said if they found anything they are supposed to report it to the lost n found section. I started to search.

It was around 6pm and I traced my steps back to the kitchen section, sort of in panic now but still confident that something will turn up. My bag had all my money, cards, phone and my passport so it was a big deal but I just kept saying to myself that all-is-well. I went to the lost n found section but nothing had been reported there. They said that sometimes the staff returns the items just before they go home which is around 9:30pm. Which means I had to wait for 3 more hours. Then suddenly I remembered I had gone to the restroom after the kitchen section and I was very confident I will find my bag there. I ran there, looked around but didn't find it. I panicked. In those 3 hours, I scanned the shoes section 4 times, the restroom 3 times and checked with the lost-and-found section maybe 10 times. At 9pm, I broke down.

I really could not understand what am I supposed to do now... I had no money, no phone , no passport. Then I noticed the kitchen stuff I had with me. Ok I could return that and get some cash back. I rushed to that section, was crying like mad and asked them to return the stuff. The guy at the counter asked me what happened and when I told him everything, he offered that he would go with me to the lost-and-found section and ask them for the cctv recording. I thought it was a good idea. So I took my 74.5 bucks back and then went to the lnf section. There I was told that to see the cctv recording I had to get the police report and they gave me the address of the nearest preccint. And yes, in between I also went to the visitor section where they had a free isd phone, I left a voicemail for Movin and called up home and told them everything. Then I started for the police station, or the preccint as it was called.

I managed to read the street numbers etc and reach the preccint without my phone, which I am proud of. Anyways when I reached there I came to know that Macy's actually dont record anything. The cameras are just dummy. And for losing the passport they issued me a note which I was supposed to take to the Indian embassy, where they would give me a letter which would allow me to leave the US and enter India (not UK) and then I would have to reapply for a new passport and all other visas. Anyways I decided there is nothing I can do now except to go back to the hotel and prepare to stay in India for the next 6 months or so.

I reached the hotel, completely feeling at loss, very hungry, very tired and terribly sad and helpless. I opened my laptop, started googling for 'lost Indian passport in US' when this mail pops up from the hotel - 'We have got an anonymous call saying if u want ur passport, call this number' and there was a number. This was it! I jumped but how am I supposed to call without a phone ? Somebody had recently mentioned they use Google Voice for International calls and Google gives 10 bucks talktime to all employees. Cool, I thought I would try that! I set it up and then finally dialed this number... I was really really excited. (By the way, network in my hotel room was good only near the door which was far from my bed so I was sitting on the floor just behind the door). So I dialed this number and came a very scary, heavy accented voice of a lady - Hullo!!

I told her about the email I had got and thanked her for the pain she took etc but unfortunately could not understand what she was saying bcoz of the accent. I could only comprehend that she was asking me to come to a particular address in some place called Bronx right then if I wanted the passport. Now I didnt know anything about Bronx but I was really happy and told her that I will definitely come but will call her back as I could not understand the address. I went to the reception, told them the whole story and requested them to talk to her and get me the address. The guy at the reception gave me a scary look. He told me that Bronx was the part of NY where all the criminals live and I should not even think of going there by myself. But he was anyways ready to talk on my behalf. He called that number, the lady gave her address and said she was only available that night. I thanked the receptionist but he still insisted I should not go there and suggested I should report to the police. Then I called 911.

2 policemen came up instantly to the hotel. On listening to my story, at first they started scolding me that this was not really an emergency but I told them that the lady is saying that she is only available tonight so I wanted to do something instantly. They said the only thing they can do is to take me to the police station nearest to Macy's. They refused to take me to Bronx. So I went with them in the NYPD jeep to the same preccint I went before and reported the new development. They told me that it was surely the thief who was calling me as a normal person would either drop the bag at the lost-n-found section or at the police station. They would never take it with them. The police also said that these cases were common and they usually kidnap you or ask for more money in return of your passport. They suggested that I should fill up the report form and then they would send a plain clothes detective with me to Bronx that night itself. It was almost 10:30pm and I was extremely distressed but I thought I would continue as this was the best I can do. I filled up the form and answered to all their questions (took almost 3 hours) and at 1:30 when all the formalities were over, I was told to go home and come tomorrow as there was no detective available that night. I was so angry, I told them that from the very beginning I was saying that the lady was only available that night and now they are saying they can't do anything. Well they just said sorry and offered me to drop me back to the hotel. I was totally heartbroken and physically and mentally exhausted.

I reached the hotel and was much more scared now. I was almost sure that nothing would happen the next day but thought I should at least ask the lady if she can wait till the next day. I called her again, I was crying most of the time. I didn't confront her and obviously didn't tell her that I had informed the police. I just told her that I was new in the US and am not able to figure out a way to come to Bronx at such an hour with no money (although I had around $200 cash in the hotel room) so can she wait till tomorrow. She said she will but I had to come to Bronx to take the passport. I was so so scared because that kindof confirmed that she was upto something bad otherwise why would she lie initially that she was only available that night. Anyways I told her I was really broke and she was the only person who could help me. Then Movin called at the hotel room, I told him everything, obviously he freaked out as well. He said he would take the first flight and come to NY (luckily he had a US visa) and would reach by next day noon. That was a bit reassuring. Then I don't know what came into my mind, I looked for free sms websites and started sending senti sms to that lady, telling her that I was in a very bad situation and literally begging her to be available the next day.

Then next day, obviously I couldn't eat anything and thought I would go to the police asap as they had asked me to come the next day. There was a big queue there and my turn came after an hour. They had apparently misplaced my file and basically after spending 2 hours in the preccint, I was told that there was a big backlog of detective cases and I would be called when my turn came so I may go now. I was so heartbroken, this is what I had been banking on. I told them I have the phone number and the address of a criminal, why can't they help me. But they just said that they had to follow the proper procedure. Well I couldn't do anything. I went back to the hotel and called the thief. (I was very sure she was the one otherwise why couldn't she just drop the passport somewhere instead of insisting to meet me) I tried to say that I had no money left and I cannot travel, but she said it will only take 5 dollars and that I can borrow from somewhere and then she will give me 5 dollars with the passport. ( Sure, after taking 400 dollars, she will give 5 dollars back!) Wow! But something inside me said that I should keep trying and I kept on telling her that I was from a very poor family in India and if I don't go back I would be a homeless in US. Of course I didn't tell her that I lived in London or that I could go back to India by visiting the Indian embassy. I kept on telling her how badly I needed my passport and was requesting her to drop it somewhere. My only motive was to avoid meeting her. But she kept on suggesting me ways to come to Bronx and take the passport from her.

Well then Movin came and we raced our brains. He had kindof lost hope and obviously we didn't want to encounter her. So we thought we'll say that I have fallen sick because of starvation and am in a hospital and Movin was a random guy who is ready to help me and that he can come to collect the passport and then we'll see what happened. So we called her again. (The funny thing was that she always picked up the phone and listened to me). I told her that I was starving as I had no money for food and this guy wants to help me out. And that I couldn't come as I was being rushed to a hospital and some more senti stuff. She initially refused, but then I sounded 'dying' and said she could save my life blah blah. Finally, finally, she said she didn't want to meet anybody else and she would drop the passport at the Bronx police station. And the way we jumped!!! Both of us went almost mad. After about 45 minutes, we got a call from the Bronx Preccint that somebody had reported a 'found bag with passport' and the phone number was written on the hotel room key! (So thats how she called at the first place when I got the email )

Well, we now knew it was a happy ending and I don't need to write the rest of it. We went to the Bronx  Preccint, picked up the passport and all the other stuff she had returned (comb, sunglasses, phone charger, lip-balm etc ). Obviously there was no phone or wallet. But I was extremely happy. That further confirmed that she was the thief because the hotel key was in the wallet which means she had the wallet but she never returned it. Also, the police at the Bronx preccint told me that this lady found my bag in the metro train while she had told me on the phone that she found my wallet on the stairs outside Macy's. Well whatever it was, by God's garce, it was over in 2 days (6th and 7th day of my trip). And I enjoyed the 8th day with Movin and his friends in New jersey and finally flew back on the 9th day as planned.

But they were very long 6th and 7th days.....