In Praise of Tears.

In Praise of Tears.

The great German Romantic poet A. W. Schlegel, asked in the lyrics of "In Praise of Tears," : "Words, what are they? One tear will say more than all of them."

Tears are the most powerful tool of communication and crying is considered superior to words as a form of communication.  It’s a survival mechanism which we are born with. When the chief justice of India broke down in front of the Prime minister, it became the national news and trending hashtag. His emotional outburst was very child like as it was a cry to attract attention and demanded a fulfillment of a long pending demand from the Man in power. Do tears betray an unforgiveable weakness or cast our leaders in a refreshingly human light? Have we finally accepted that tears are no more feminine? An anonymous British pamphlet from 1755, Man: A Paper for Ennobling the Species, proposed the idea of "moral weeping for the man. It distinguished weeping into two general kinds, genuine and counterfeit; or into physical crying and moral weeping.  Moral weeping it said, comes from the heart, and is always associated with real sentiments.

 Being a woman who demands equality from men and institutions; I always tell my male students & colleagues about two things which were exclusively a part of woman’s domain, but are now shared generously with the men folks. Tears & the color pink. I am happy that crying has shed its tag of weakness and emotional immaturity. In short it is no more feminine. In fact the leaders have recognized its worth and are using this emotional tool to its fullest for making a powerful point. Few decades back Emotions were seen as a weakness in leaders, but ever since Daniel Goldman’s theory of Emotional intelligence became popular, it has gained fair amount of acceptance with leaders, entrepreneurs, sportsmen, performers and heads of nations. In today’s challenging world, showing your emotions is not a sign of weakness or lack of leadership but a sign of strength. To put it in Charlotte Brontë words —Crying does not indicate that you are weak. Since birth, it has always been a sign that you are alive.'

In recent times, male politicians have rushed to bare their sniveling sensitive souls in public. Abraham Lincoln skillfully employed tears in his oratory. In Modern times, every US president since Reagan has deployed a strategic tear or two to be seen as human and powerless. Barack Obama, the most powerful Man on earth, has cried several times on National Platforms. So much so that the catchy phrase “No-Drama Obama” is used both to praise and criticize the President. Most modern-day US presidents or candidates have succumbed to their emotions in public. Former presidents George Bush - both junior and senior, Bill and Hillary Clinton, have all been caught crying at some point. The Ex Brazilian President Lula da Silva was known for his emotional outbursts, memorably shedding tears in 2009 after the announcement that Rio de Janeiro would be the host for the 2016 Olympics. Other leaders who are catching the teary band wagon are, the Ex President of Afghanistan, Hamid Karzai, the Macho leader of Russia, Valadimir Putin, the colorful leader of Italy Silvio Burlesconi, to former Australian prime minister Bob Hawke,who became famous for crying during his time in office. Despite his tough-guy image, he cried while talking about his daughter's drug addiction.

Back home our own Strong Prime Minister Modi has surprisingly choked up on few occasions, the first being the day when he entered the Parliament. Omar Abdullah, Yuvraj Singh, Sachin Tendulkar, and every other judge( not the SC/HC one) who appeared on talent shows, not to forget Amir Khan, who almost cried without shame on every episode of Satyamev Jayate. 

Steve Jobs, the maverick innovator, was a highly emotional person. He often cried when thwarted in some minor goal or ambition, according to Walter Isaacson’s biography. He cried over just about everything. He cried at the beginning of Apple after his friend and partner Steve Wozniak's father pushed his son to take more ownership of the company because he thought Jobs wasn't doing much work Jobs cried when his employee badge and roll call was reduced to #2 instead of #1( wozniak), then ended up getting badge #0. He cried when Apple pushed him out of the company. He cried at Pixar during a battle with Disney. He cried when Time put the Mac on its cover instead of him. He cried when he saw the famous Apple "1984" ad for the first time. He cried about Windows "copying" the Mac. He cried over design questions, He cried over deep issues of personal privacy, , He cried because he wanted the original Apple II to have a one-year warranty, rather than 90 days, and Phew! I simply lost the count of his weepy shows in his biography. 

Women leaders are usually damned if they do cry and damned if they don't. When Hillary Clinton cried during her presidential campaign against Obama, the event was seized on by critics as "proof" that she was "not tough enough" to take it in the top job. And soon Obama proved the entire anti- tier lobby wrong. He has deployed this lethal weapon several times and proved that if used at the right time and in the right place, tears can soften our hearts and make often distant-looking politicians appear human. He should be credited for giving the tears an acceptability which was long overdue at an international platform.

But why do these powerful men cry?

Crying is a natural emotional response to certain feelings, usually sadness and hurt. Most psychologists agree that it is seen as far more acceptable to cry in public than it was several decades ago. We want our leaders to be stronger and smarter than we are but no less human.  Letting your guard down shows you don't have all the answers, so when you ask for help people know you're sincere and are much more likely to respond.  It may also indicate that you are frustrated, overwhelmed or even just trying to get someone's attention, which researchers call a ''secondary gain'' cry.

So how should be calibrate the tears of CJI Thakur? Was he petitioning to the Prime Minister with his tears? In Saint Marie Magdalens Funeral Teares, Robert Southwell writes of tears as if they were attorneys: "Thy tears will obtaine. They are too mighty oratours, to let any suite fall, and though they pleaded at the most rigorous barre, yet haue they so persuading a silense, and so conquering a complaint that they by yielding ouercome, and by intreating they comaund." 

Did the CJI figured his tears as attorneys, just as Southwell suggested? Did he combine the tears of worship, tears of heroism and beauty, and tears of petition in a slightly new way?  Was the CJI displaying a pure emotion out of frustration?  or was it a ‘secondary gain cry’ to attract the attention of the Prime Minister? Were his tears simply serving a social function? to win support from the executive to get what he wanted?  Whatever it was, it did tell us that tears are no more a pitifully self-indulgent symbol of modern times, it can make hearts melt & leaders listen, as soon after, the Prime Minister suggested that they need to meet in private.

.