prasad1
Active member
On reading recently that the 2014 Pritzker Prize, considered the equivalent of the Nobel Prize, in architecture, was awarded to Japanese architect Shigeru Ban, my first thought was: why doesn’t an Indian win such prizes? The Pritzker Prize honours a living architect for excellence in architecture, ‘irrespective of nationality, creed, race, or ideology’.
No Indian has ever been nominated.
Some exceptions, of course, prove the rule. Take the example of Subhash Khot, the Indian-American theoretical computer scientist who last week won the International Mathematical Union’s Rolf Nevanlinna Prize. He studied in a humble school in Ichalkaranji in Maharashtra, doing his middle school and high school years there, then topped the JEE to gain admission to IIT Powai before leaving for the United States. The winner of the IMU’s Fields Medal, Manjul Bhargava, also has Indian origins, but was not educated in India.
India-born scholars winning top prizes in mathematics is indeed great news. However, even this re-emphasises the point. Although their educational foundation might have been laid in India, they are, in essence, Western-backed scholars who were exceptional but whose talent was nurtured to the fullest in the West and not in their home country. They might be ‘India-born’, but are not or ‘India-nurtured’ success stories.
There is a paradox in the way we treat talent in India: on the one hand, parents rarely allow their children to pursue research careers in pure sciences, and the educational system is structured to hone memory, not talent. On the other hand, we are quick to ‘claim’ Indian talent that has shined outside the country as our own achievement.
There have also been a handful of other celebrated global-level achievers over the decades, but except in the case of an innate genius such as Srinivasa Ramanujam, how many of them were shaped and moulded by the educational system prevalent in India?
Made in India? - The Hindu
No Indian has ever been nominated.
Some exceptions, of course, prove the rule. Take the example of Subhash Khot, the Indian-American theoretical computer scientist who last week won the International Mathematical Union’s Rolf Nevanlinna Prize. He studied in a humble school in Ichalkaranji in Maharashtra, doing his middle school and high school years there, then topped the JEE to gain admission to IIT Powai before leaving for the United States. The winner of the IMU’s Fields Medal, Manjul Bhargava, also has Indian origins, but was not educated in India.
India-born scholars winning top prizes in mathematics is indeed great news. However, even this re-emphasises the point. Although their educational foundation might have been laid in India, they are, in essence, Western-backed scholars who were exceptional but whose talent was nurtured to the fullest in the West and not in their home country. They might be ‘India-born’, but are not or ‘India-nurtured’ success stories.
There is a paradox in the way we treat talent in India: on the one hand, parents rarely allow their children to pursue research careers in pure sciences, and the educational system is structured to hone memory, not talent. On the other hand, we are quick to ‘claim’ Indian talent that has shined outside the country as our own achievement.
There have also been a handful of other celebrated global-level achievers over the decades, but except in the case of an innate genius such as Srinivasa Ramanujam, how many of them were shaped and moulded by the educational system prevalent in India?
Made in India? - The Hindu
