Sad! Journalist Aroon Tikekar dies and national media doesn't even know

In India, English continues to be the dominant language of the public discourse. Whatever appears in English news journals or TV channels is followed by the language journals and channels in their coverage than the other way round. As a result, language communities having individuals in English media get greater coverage than those who do not have such representation. Regional or community festivals, theatre or literary events of such communities which are adequately represented in the English media get limelight easily.

Thanks to their remarkable English language skills, Bengali, Tamil or Kannada communities have found greater representation in the English media as against their Marathi, Oriya, or Assamese counterparts. This could, perhaps, explain why the sad demise of Dr Aroon Tikekar, which almost brought the glorious tradition of shaping intellectual discourse through thoughtful editorials in language newspapers to an end, could not become news in non-Marathi media.

Tikekar, of course, would have shed no tears for this. He was not only aware, but deeply worried about the rapid and all pervading de-intellectualisation of the society. He used to blame the media and academia, and elements that would always happily play to the gallery. He was a rationalist to the core but never tried to wear it on his sleeves.

A firm believer in values, Tikekar chose to swim against the tide and refused to become someone who cannot say "no". He never minced words, but never tried to exploit the power to criticise as well. He was progressive and forward-looking, but he knew very well that social reforms take time and for that one has to take all elements along. On principles and policies he was uncompromising, but never ever tried to impose his opinions on others. He was the editor of Loksatta for over a decade.

Under his editorship, Loksatta earned a place in the hearts of the entire Marathi community as he diversified its content, localised the news coverage and established an enduring rapport with the readers. All this he did with an unattached involvement. He was friendly to several politicians but it was they who would come under the influence of his wit, knowledge and rational thinking and not the other way round.

More importantly, he would long be remembered as an institution-builder. He possessed rarely-found deep insights into the art of institution-building. His book Cloister's Pale: A Biography of the University of Mumbai, chronicling the history of the university published at its post-centennial jubilee very effectively tells the story of how growth of an institution is intertwined with that of the social-cultural climate around.

While discharging duties as president of the 200-year-old The Asiatic Society of Mumbai, Tikekar provided excellent leadership, cultivated a team of dedicated office bearers and helped the institution regain its position in the academic and cultural life of Mumbai. He was a scholar beyond doubt, but although a voracious reader, he also used to relish reading persons, shape their thinking and inculcate some passion for intellectualism in them.

He groomed several journalists, mentored a number of scholars and also held the hands of several constructive social and cultural organisations like Chaturang. For the people in Loksatta, The Asiatic Society of Mumbai, or at the reference section of The Times of India, Tikekar always came across as a systematiser, a creative institution-builder.

In his demise many have lost their unassuming friend, philosopher with a clarity of thoughts and a guide who would never give ready-made answers!