Direction: The psychological causes of unhappiness, it is clear, are many and various, but all have something in common. The typical unhappy man, is one who, having been deprived in youth of some normal satisfaction, has come to value this one kind of satisfaction more than any other and has therefore given to his life a one-sided direction, together with a quite undue emphasis upon the achievement as opposed to the activities connected with it. There is, however, a further development which is very common in the present day. A man may feel so completely thwarted that he seeks no form of satisfaction, but only distraction and oblivion. He then becomes a devotee of ‘pleasure'. This is to say, he seeks to make life bearable by becoming less alive. Drunkenness, for example, is temporary suicide the happiness that it brings is merely negative, a momentary cessation of unhappiness.

Direction: The basic culture of the company flows top down. And therefore, it becomes paramount on the part of the top management to lead by precedents. If you look around, there is a severe dearth of leaders who talk and talk the walk. We often see leaders openly preaching austerity but practicing opulence with nauseating disesteem in the constraint of their four walls. ‘You reap what you sow’ is the law of nature. By sowing double standards, you cannot expect principled conduct from your employees. A majority of the people fall prey to mounting insecurities as they climb up the ladder of success, that is why the basis of people management is totally forgotten and sycophantic attributes are embraced with impunity. It is a known fact that right conduct is practiced by half while wrong actions are espoused manifold. Employers need to respect their employees and have to be compassionate towards them; only then can you create the progressive edifice.

Direction: Classics are works of enduring excellence, judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality. The world they recreate serves as an anchor to the past, preventing us from deviating too far from the values, traditions and morals that have come to define the best of human society. If making a literary work more ‘current’ involves corrupting it, should we not think twice about doing so? Modern society may already have hit rock bottom, there is no need to dig deeper and erode the little decency that remains. And what is the use of making a classic more ‘accessible’ if it results in losing the subtle charm, appeal, and charisma of the original? If the magic is lost, the young reader today will see little reason to explore the classic anyway. And the claim that the modifications will preserve the original’s beauty doesn’t seem convincing. This is not to say that the classics are devoid of sensuality. However, it is conveyed through subtlety, delicacy and restraint-where what is not said is just as important as what is, and where good taste and decency triumphs over needlessly lurid prose. This is something that society today needs more of meaningful entertainment that broadens the consumer’s horizons and improves his outlook. Otherwise, all sense and sensibility will be gone with the wind!.