Home » Life » Retirement: An Iconic Struggle

Retirement: An Iconic Struggle

By Ajay Vishwanathan February 12, 2009 at 2:21 AM

Font size:

I watched with young and startled eyes as my grandfather stormed into my house, gave my quiet father a mouthful and stormed away. It was the first time I witnessed a big deal being made about retirement. My grandfather was upset that his obedient son had, against his wishes, decided to take voluntary retirement from his company to focus full time on teaching. Although my father didn’t fall into the category, I figure smart companies try to get rid of dead wood by tempting older, self-serving and often mulish liabilities to leave the ship. The employee does not usually complain, because the severance package is designed to offset the risk inherent in taking a new job.

Today, I am convinced that the virtue of retirement lies in its timing. You know you got it right when most people around you openly wish you stayed. Looking at several icons around me, I have noticed with regret that the right timing, unfortunately, often loses the battle to an aversion to relinquish.

Take Lata Mangeshkar: the sweetness of her voice sets off a wave of goose bumps as she sings for Nargis, “Aaja sanam madhur chandni mein hum,” in Chori Chori, a 1956-remake of It Happened One Night. Its mellifluousness and effortless charm that makes me cringe when I listen to Lata in movies like Dil To Pagal Hai. “I love this song,” remarked a friend, referring to a number from the 2004 mega-hit Veer Zaara, “till the part when Lata joins in.” Many of her fans may not agree, but in my assessment she should have quit in the early to mid-1980s when Bollywood music was afflicted with insipid and pedestrian scores.

Amitabh Bachchan is another icon who has outlived his career. I had to turn off the DVD even before the film took off, because I couldn’t bring myself to witness the degeneration of the stylish and nifty Vijay of the 1970s as his hoary eyes lusted for an 18-year old squirt in Nishabd. Some of his fans argue that he is doing roles now that he couldn’t have essayed during his peak. But I, for one, don’t feel the urge to rush to his movies, first day first show, as I did in his heydays. True, there are rare gems like Cheeni Kum, but they lie so deeply buried in an avalanche of lamentable fare that with every passing movie, my adoration turns into sympathy for the man who refuses to withdraw from the glare.

Then there is Sachin Tendulkar. I have skipped classes to watch him bat, and have converted idle conversations into raging debates on his contribution to Indian cricket. But that was then. Today, Sachin might still be looking for that one last glory knock (which, I hope, for his sake, came at long last in his match-winning inning during the Chennai Test against England), but in the process he is trampling upon his carefully crafted image as a cricket terror every time he walks on to the field. Every time he loses his timber tamely, shabbily nicks one to the keeper, or crumples to the ground after a single, holding his calf in pain, the image blurs a little more. These days, he is falling apart physically as rapidly as an American car that has clocked 100,000 miles. During most of the calendar year, he is injured, resting, or in Australia for treatment. The agony of his fast-depleting fan base, he should understand, is a sobering blow to the very game he pledges he loves.

Even the great Kapil Dev protracted his presence in Indian cricket just to become the world’s highest wicket-taker. It was saddening to see Kumble bowl wide outside the stumps to tail-enders so that Kapil could get his wickets from the other end. The Hindu lamented that Kapil’s last years “reminded one of a weary veteran past his prime and not of the enthusiastic Haryanvi who came in like a breath of fresh air.” His drawn out denouement hurt Indian cricket by delaying the grooming of bowlers like Javagal Srinath.

The famous Indian columnist, MV Kamath, while defending the dragged out Bachchan’s career, attacked cricketers like Sachin for their unwillingness to retire, noting that “Cricket is not Bollywood.” Despite some forgettable films, Kamath said, Bachchan has turned out to be bigger than the films heacted in. “The success or failure (of Bollywood stars) on the silver screen or in television channels is strictly their business,” he commented. “(But) if the Indian team performs poorly it hurts the average psyche.” Kamath is giving short shrift to the pain that millions of Bollywood enthusiasts like me must endure by witnessing the harrowing decline of their idols.

This iconic struggle with retirement is a worldwide phenomenon and is not restricted to sports or glamour. Robert Mugabe, a once popular leader, has violently overstayed his welcome as Zimbabwe president, to the world’s chagrin.

Then there are bewildering stories of stars coming back from retirement. Brett Favre, a Green Bay Packers quarterback whose name is mentioned in the same breath as other American Football legends, turned misty eyed as a somber nation watched him bid goodbye to the game. He reversed his decision as dramatically, following up with even more unfortunate choices, and now plays for the New York Jets. Michael Jordan, a basketball genius, came back twice from retirement; while the first created some melodramatic moments, the second soiled his legacy.

So, what prompts these heroes to corrupt their illustrious careers with feeble epilogues? Or overstay their vocation to the point of mustiness? A two-time Ironman Triathlon champion, Scott Tinley, in his book, Racing the Sunset; An Athlete’s Quest for Life After Sport, talked about how he recovered from a devastating post-retirement depression that threw his life into chaos, “You just have to let the old you die in order to let a new person grow.” Most superstars are so habituated to public adulation and attention that sudden obscurity kills their psyche. The delay in retirement is likely related to the mortification of being relegated into a nonentity, fear of having nothing to do with an occupation that defined them. Many continue to perform because they think they are still good; others because the money is good. The inability to answer the “what next” question prompts them to defer the inevitable. They don’t realize or don’t care that their selfishness has repercussions on the very people they are so dearly holding on to: an attenuating fan base, frustration among the management and colleagues, and growing despair among the new talents who await their turn.

Even those who find success doing something else, experience the tug. “I’ve been successful with a lot of business things, but if I told you that took the place of boxing I’d be lying,” said George Foreman, the oldest boxer to become heavyweight champion. “The thrill of a crowd roaring for you after just winning a boxing match, nothing touches that.” Sachin Tendulkar probably gets the same thrill from watching his bat arch gracefully and the ball fly through the covers. But he should spare fans like me the agony of witnessing their slow death. What these self-serving icons need is an intelligent, but painless execution of a golden handshake.

Share on:

Digg

Comments (3 posted)

DesiWriter March 9, 2009 at 9:38 AM

Apparently Ajay Vishwanathan\'s experience of seeing his father being rebuked by his grandfather was too traumatic, else why would he paint everyone with the same brush. I agree with him on Lata and Sachin - these are clear examples where the spirit is willing but flesh is weak - effects of age have taken their toll and body (parts) are no longer supple or limber enough. Sachin specially seems to hang around for 10-12 matches, hits one century or a high score and then his skills vanish for next 15-20 innings again. Anyone else not supported by Bombay lobby would have long been tossed over - not aapno Sachin - decades later - he is still around. But I digress, where I totally differ from Ajay\'s opinion is on Amitabh - who in my opinion seems to have matured with age. Yes, I would have had a problem if he was still doing a main hero\'s role or running around trees but I haven\'t seen his skills wane, rather just getting better. Of course if you happen to be a Amitabh hater then it doesn\'t matter what you see or what I may say. But coming back to Ajay\'s point - if it was as elementary as - you old, you no good - then I guess Ajay would tell Manmohan Singh and APJ Abdul Kalam that they should sit at home and watch TV.

Jatin G (Decatur, GA) February 23, 2009 at 1:35 AM

Little India: it takes guts to say the unpopular thing (RE: Retirement: An Iconic Struggle). The stars the author chose to highlight are very popular and reach most of us, Indians, at a sentimental level. I am also one of them. I was initially offended by the views but after a deeper introspection, and a few re-reads, I begun to agree with the views of the writer (who also seems to be a fan of the very icons). Retirement is probably a personal and subjective thing but some of the stars owe it to their core audience (and not the producers and the money-givers) to give them a timely goodbye. Thanks Little India for this article- which I\'m sure gets a lot of heated feedback - that words its sentiments very well.

Uday Hebbar February 21, 2009 at 12:53 AM

This article is very well articulated and some of the arguments are compelling. It is good to see Little India continue to publish articles that are not always politically correct and crowd-pleasing.
In my opinion, a lot of those people who were named in the article probably have not retired because they love to do the things they do and even though they may be past their prime they are still better then a load of people in their field.
If people love what they do and they are still good (not great) at it why should they consider retiring?
For what do people retire? Glory? Money? Or for themselves?