The Fall of the Iconoclasts

[Sachinism]

I ask'd thee, "Give me immortality." Then didst thou grant mine asking with a smile, Like wealthy men who care not how they give. But thy strong Hours indignant work'd their wills, And beat me down and marr'd and wasted me, And tho' they could not end me, left me maim'd To dwell in presence of immortal youth, Immortal age beside immortal youth, And all I was in ashes. t was not too long ago that I was reminded of Lord Alfred Tennyson's Tithonus. Tennyson was inspired by the tragic love of the mortal Tithonus and Eos, the Goddess of Dawn. Homer tells us that Eos requested Zeus to grant Tithonus the boon of immortal life, that he may live alongside Eos for eternity. In her haste however, Eos overlooked asking for immortal youth; thus, Tithonus was doomed to wither and grow old, while remaining incapable of dying. Immortal age beside immortal youth. The legend of Tithonus presents a standard trope in classic Greek tragedy, the downfall of the noble hero triggered by that most damning of flaws: hubris. In his hubris Tithonus seeks to defy Time and the natural order. Time ultimately has his revenge. Which brings me, by an admittedly circuitous route, to this: India's tour of England may have been a disaster. But India's tour of Australia has been a tragedy. The dominant narrative coming out of Australia is that of an erstwhile great batting lineup struggling and failing. Rahul Dravid seems to have aged exponentially since his glorious summer in England; VVS Laxman has searched for form away from home for a year now; even Sachin Tendulkar, despite looking in fine nick, has been unable to convert his starts into meaningful scores. Struggle has not always implied failure for these batsmen. 2010 saw Laxman brave back spasms on two separate occasions to inspire India to memorable victories over Sri Lanka and Australia. Sachin Tendulkar famously ended a lean spell by eschewing shots on the off side to score his then-highest test score in 2004. Sid Vaidyanathan has written quite beautifully on Rahul Dravid's mastery of the struggle. To many Indians, these three batsmen represent the core of a test team that accomplished much. They shrugged off their reputation as poor travelers and won test matches in every test playing nation, while winning series' in England, New Zealand and the West Indies and drawing series' in South Africa and Australia. In addition, they forged a side that was one of the toughest to beat at home. For Indian fans used to the mediocrity of the 1990s, this went beyond competitiveness, beyond a number 1 ranking on which India's hold was always tenuous. This was iconoclastic. And it was iconoclasm of a sort that not only allowed for hubris, but engendered it. In the wake of Australia's disintegration post-2008, it was apposite that the Australians' strongest challenger in the glory years (England 2005 notwithstanding) would fill the vacuum left at the top of the hierarchy. This was where the seeds of the tragedy were sown, when the leap occurred. First from competitiveness to iconoclasm. And then from iconoclasm to hubris. To dare to assume the mantle of Number One after history's greatest team! Immortality has always been the preserve of the Gods. Indeed, it is not just that immortality flows from Godliness; to be immortal is to be a God. Tithonus never desired more than immortality, yet his fatal conceit was to ignore just how unachievable his desire truly was. Immortality is never something that can be demanded. In the cricketing realm, there are but one or two teams that can claim to have been true legends, truly immortal: The great Windies teams from 1976 to 1994 and the great Australian teams of the past decade. To be a team on that scale is not just difficult, but near impossible. Certainly more so than it is to become Number One. Yet, a shift in our collective understanding of what the top ranking entails sees us conflate the Number One spot with immortality far too often. I put it down to the temporal proximity of Waugh and Ponting's Australians, but the evidence is there. Talks of "final frontiers", "true number ones" and the rest. It is not just enough that England be the number one team- the perception is that England must win the subcontinent to be a true number one, much as India needed to win in England. Consider the subtle shift there: not just be winners, but be winners of an unimpeachable variety. It is no longer enough that a team be a little bit better than its nearest competitors: it must be overwhelmingly so. That this expectation is fostered in a cricketing landscape as shifting as ours is even more perplexing. Indeed, it is hubris. The fan's desire to see the next great team, or the next great player, is a powerful one. Tennis fans rub their hands in glee at the thought that they are seeing two of the greatest tennis players of all-time in Rafa Nadal and Roger Federer. Basketball fans from the 90s superciliously assure us that there will never be another Michael Jordan. Back in 2006, I was bemused to find that a friend from Iowa professed strong support for the Duke Blue Devils and the New England Patriots. Ben's rationale was a simple one: "I enjoy dynasties, I want dynasties." Much as we like to believe that the underdog holds a privileged place in the hearts of real sports fans, Ben may have been onto something. Ben was tapping into the collective hubris of sports fans everywhere, in any sport. To not just see the very good. No, to see the very best. Iconoclasm and hubris. We are all vulnerable and we will all at some point in our lives fall; we will all fall. We must carry this in our hearts©Õhat what we have is special. That it can be taken from us and that when it is taken from us we will be tested©Øe will be tested to our very souls. We will now all be tested. It is these times©Êt is this pain that allows us to look inside ourselves. Gautam Gambhir's technique has been put under intense scrutiny on this tour of Australia. His travails against the rising ball outside off stump have been well documented. Pay attention to the phrases used by fans and critics: talk is of Gambhir having regressed, having let old bad habits sneak back into his game while adopting a flawed limited overs cricket technique with his angled bat. The feeling is overwhelmingly one of a return to a prior state, of progress forestalled. Ditto with Ishant Sharma, who seems to have moved laterally at best. He remains inconsistent, offering up an obligatory ball down the leg side every over. Ishant's shortcomings are cast in especially harsh relief by the exploits of a James Pattinson, who has come on in leaps and bounds. As disappointing as this regression from a player like Gambhir can be, the struggles of the veterans are of a wholly more depressing nature. Implicit in an accusation of regression is the belief that progress was achievable, or at the very least sustained excellence. It was but two years ago that Gambhir was named the ICC Test Player of the Year and many Indian fans harbored hopes of a great partnership being built up at the top of the order. Insofar as we see him reverting to the uncertain batsman that he once was, we see a progression forestalled. With Gambhir and Ishant, we moan the stumbles on the way up, regression halting progression. In the lament, there is the potential of a future; indeed, it is the lament of a future unrealized as of now. The struggle of the veterans is a wholly different beast. We wonder at the phenomenon of a player of Dravid's technique getting bowled time after time. Of a player of Laxman's astonishing ability stumbling right out of the blocks. Of a Sachin Tendulkar unable to capitalize on his fine form. It has gradually dawned on us that Australia will prove a bridge too far even for the iconoclasts. This is the end game- this is how things will stand. In an oft-quoted line from T. S. Eliot's The Hollow Men, we are told that this is how the world ends. Not with a bang, but a whimper. It was so in England last summer, and so it is in Australia. These men reached the peak, which is where we find them now. For they did not regress. They fell. One only needs to look at the reactions in the aftermath of Perth and Sydney: almost in unison, the calls are for the galacticos to retire. There is no question of making technical changes to progress farther. Faltering at the end game necessitates a break, an end. And so it goes. Which brings us back to why the fall of the iconoclasts has been dominated by a theme of hubris. Fans and former players have implicitly accused VVS Laxman of hubris, of seeking to carry on longer than he could- should- have and of thus jeopardizing the team's chances. Yet, could one begrudge Laxman the desire to conquer that final frontier (there it is again)? Which Indian fan did not just hope for, but expect a series victory this time around? These expectations were borne out of the many achievements of Laxman's generation. The expectation, nay, desire was that the iconoclasts would pass into immortality. This Indian team has now arrived at the denouement of the tragedy. To be sure, Rahul Dravid, VVS Laxman and even Sachin Tendulkar are nearing the end. Their distinguished careers notwithstanding, the events of the past year must necessarily form a part of their legacies for they were central players. The burden of history cuts both ways, even for those special few. As for the hubris; that is a responsibility that the Tithonus in every one of us must share. In the days of navel-gazing that stretch ahead for Indian cricket, this is a lesson that would not be amiss. http://www.thesightscreen.com/post-match-opinions/the-fall-of-the-iconoclasts/

[Sachinism]

Thanks for the formatting :hatsoff:

[satishg]

Nice article, in a way we are responsible for immortalizing our galacticos i guess. We just wanted them to play on and on for everyone had their own hero in the big 4 rather than trying to nurture young replacements. I am not sure how this situation could have been handled because we were so proud of our batting might and we always boasted about how good our middle order was so i guess embracing this spectacular fall of our heroes would be the rational thing to do right now. They have given us so many good memories, so the last 2 series would just appear as a blip when we look back in future assuming at least couple of the seniors retire after the Oz tour.

[Ultimate_Game]

Nice article' date=' in a way [b']we are responsible for immortalizing our galacticos i guess. We just wanted them to play on and on for everyone had their own hero in the big 4 rather than trying to nurture young replacements. I am not sure how this situation could have been handled because we were so proud of our batting might and we always boasted about how good our middle order was so i guess embracing this spectacular fall of our heroes would be the rational thing to do right now. They have given us so many good memories, so the last 2 series would just appear as a blip when we look back in future assuming at least couple of the seniors retire after the Oz tour.

Pls don't paint everyone with the same brush. There were many of us who wanted to see youngsters like Rohit and Rahane in against WI and phase out the seniors. There are indian cricket fans who don't consider Tendulkar "God" and do question the selection of seniors just because "class is permanent".

[satishg]

Pls don't paint everyone with the same brush. There were many of us who wanted to see youngsters like Rohit and Rahane in against WI and phase out the seniors. There are indian cricket fans who don't consider Tendulkar "God" and do question the selection of seniors just because "class is permanent".

I was not talking about West Indies series, i was actually referring to the phasing out process which should have started very much earlier. The youngsters cannot come and perform overnight and they also need the guidance of senior pros, so someone should have bitten the bullet and started the retirement process. They did it for Sourav and Sourav did play well in his last series, so i dont know why they dint do it for others.

[Laaloo]

The ideal process was for Dravid to retire after the England 2010 series. Laxman as well and for Sachin to retie after this Aus series or the series next year against England. But now, that won't happen and we're properly getting thrashed and we deserve every bit of it.