Oral History Program Priti Kumar Interviewed by Kandice Harris 1 November 2023 Oral History Program Weber State University Stewart Library Ogden, Utah Priti Kumar Interviewed by Kandice Harris 1 November 2023 Copyright © 2026 by Weber State University, Stewart Library Mission Statement The Oral History Program of the Stewart Library was created to preserve the institutional history of Weber State University and the Davis, Ogden and Weber County communities. By conducting carefully researched, recorded, and transcribed interviews, the Oral History Program creates archival oral histories intended for the widest possible use. Interviews are conducted with the goal of eliciting from each participant a full and accurate account of events. The interviews are transcribed, edited for accuracy and clarity, and reviewed by the interviewees (as available), who are encouraged to augment or correct their spoken words. The reviewed and corrected transcripts are indexed, printed, and bound with photographs and illustrative materials as available. The working files, original recording, and archival copies are housed in the University Archives. Project Description The Weber State University Oral History Project began conducting interviews with key Weber State University faculty, administrators, staff and students, in Fall 2007. The program focuses primarily on obtaining a historical record of the school along with important developments since the school gained university status in 1990. The interviews explore the process of achieving university status, as well as major issues including accreditation, diversity, faculty governance, changes in leadership, curricular developments, etc. ____________________________________ Oral history is a method of collecting historical information through recorded interviews between a narrator with firsthand knowledge of historically significant events and a well-informed interviewer, with the goal of preserving substantive additions to the historical record. Because it is primary material, oral history is not intended to present the final, verified, or complete narrative of events. It is a spoken account. It reflects personal opinion offered by the interviewee in response to questioning, and as such it is partisan, deeply involved, and irreplaceable. ____________________________________ Rights Management This work is the property of the Weber State University, Stewart Library Oral History Program. It may be used freely by individuals for research, teaching and personal use as long as this statement of availability is included in the text. It is recommended that this oral history be cited as follows: Kumar, Priti, an oral history by Kandice Harris, 1 November 2023, WSU Stewart Library Oral History Program, Special Collections and University Archives, Stewart Library, Weber State University, Ogden, UT. iii Priti Kumar Circa 2000 Abstract: The following is an oral history interview with Priti Kumar, conducted on November 1, 2023 in the Stewart Library by Kandice Harris. Priti talks about early life in India, her move to the United States, and her position at Weber State University. Also present is Raegan Baird, the video technician. Note: Active listening, transitions in dialogue (such as “um,” “so,” “you know,” etc.), and false starts in conversations are not included in transcription for ease of reading. All additions to transcript noted with brackets. KH: Okay, great. Today is November 1, 2023. We are doing an oral history with Priti Kumar. Present is Raegan Baird filming, and Annelie Furner and Kandice Harris is doing the interview. When and where were you born? PK: I was born on October 16, 1937. In a very small princely state, Dholpur. We call it a state because there were independent states at that time in India. KH: Oh, wow. Would you talk a little bit about what your growing up life was like? PK: Yes, I can talk. Sometime when I look back, I think that maybe I have lived many lives because my life has changed very, very much over the years, as everybody's does. The early part of my childhood was spent in this small princely state. Princely state at that time, before 1947, India was divided into little states ruled by Maharajas as kings. So that's why they were called princely. Those states had their Maharaja as the head of the government, and then he will have the ministers. They were not religious ministers, but they were the men called ministers in charge of certain areas of governments. My family originally belonged to Delhi, which is the center part of India. But then my greatgrandfather moved to the state of Dholpur because I come from a class/caste 1 which is famous for education. He was working with the state government. Almost all the princely states at that time in India employed well-educated people who knew how to run the government. My great-grandfather moved from Delhi to Dholpur, I was told. I remember my grandfather very well; he was the revenue minister. Revenue minister means he was in charge of all the tax collection. Very hard job, but very honest job. My grandfather had two other brothers, and they were also employed by the Maharaja. One of them was a personal minister to the Maharajah and their youngest brother was the surgeon general of the state. So, you can see they were all highly educated. My grandfather by profession was a teacher before moving to the state. He was a mathematician, and he wrote some books. My grand uncle also was very highly educated. The youngest grand uncle was the first Indian surgeon to work for the Viceroy, who was the British equivalent of the head of the government in India, which was a great honor. He was one of the first MDs at that time, I was told, and they were honored by the British government also. When I was growing up, my grandfather and my family lived together. You have to understand, in India, it's very common. It is almost essential that the multi-generational families live together. I never saw my grandmother because she died very early, and my grandfather never remarried. I have vivid memories of my grandfather, of my parents and my siblings and my extended families because the two brothers of my grandfather also lived there with their families. 2 So, I felt that we had a very big, large family, and families are very important in India. We, children, as we were growing up, lacked nothing or we didn't know what we lacked at that time. We were happy, and we knew the rules. That was a patriarchal society. My grandfather was a figurehead and literally nothing will happen in the household without his permission. My mother was the practical manager of the household, but there were a lot of servants. Having a servant was kind of a prestigious thing, but also a common thing in India at that time. My mother was really managing the house, running the household, with the help of several helpers. As children, we had just one job, to study, play, and enjoy. But we knew the rules as they were very clear. We knew if you want something then go to the grandfather, if he says yes, nobody is going to say no. We were really loved very much. That's what I remember. Whatever happened in the house, the children were the most important thing, and our birthdays were very special. Not a big celebration, but the main attraction was the child whose birthday it was. I have very fond memories of my happy childhood. I am surprised some time now that why we were not very spoiled because we were kind of privileged and protected. The whole princely state had three automobiles and all three belonged to our extended family. KH: Oh, nice. PK: Yeah, my grandfather had a Morris, a British car, and my one grand uncle had an Opel and my other grand uncle had Chevrolet. Other than that, Maharaja had automobiles. We never walked to go anywhere. My father was a magistrate and 3 judge. He started with a law degree, and he was appointed as the magistrate, and he ended up as a civil judge. He was very educated also with a law degree. He had a horse carriage, like the ones you see in the movies now. We went to school in that carriage. We never walked anywhere. When I think back, I feel how spoiled we were. But it was fun at that time. Even in the school, the teachers and other students knew that we come from a different class of family. Our class structure included rich middle class, and the poor. Most people will come to visit us; we will not go to visit too many people. My mother was still secluded in the sense that she will not meet all the men, but meet only selective people who are our family, friends, or relatives. Because my father and grandfather received a lot of visitors. The first part of my childhood, I would say from birth to 14 years, was one phase which was very privileged, very happy and very content. Nothing was lacking. The only thing which lacked there was the education for girls. The state had a school for boys, but the girls’ education was not promoted very well. After the middle school there was no high school for girls and they couldn’t go to boys’ school because there was segregation. As I said, that my family put education first, and my mother, who could not go to school because she comes from a very big family from another state, but she and all our family knew the importance of education. She insisted, and my grandfather agreed, that I should go to Allahabad, which is a big city full of universities and educational institutions, and I studied there. 4 By this time the India got independence, so the princely states were all dissolved and merged together. That was the first thing that independent India did, because India was divided in several small princely states. My grandfather retired and after a year he passed away. He was so dear to me, and he still is. I think about him very much, because I was very close to him and he agreed that I should go to Allahabad and continue my studies. My brothers also had to leave after 10th grade. High school was 10th grade, so after 10th grade they will leave to other big cities to get education. My parents insisted that we all get education, education is/was very important. When I went to Allahabad my life changed because I realized that now I have to be a serious student [laughs]. Yeah, I am sent there to learn. So, I studied, got scholarships, and did six years of study there, and then I moved to another big city, Jodhpur, and did my master’s degree from there. The latter part of my childhood was not so privileged because my father got sick, and my grandfather died. But we knew one thing, that we all loved each other very much as a very close family, which is true to this day, all my family members are very close to each other. I have two brothers here and some relatives in India still, but we are very close. So much so that when I first came here and my daughter went to school, not in Utah, we first came to Canada. There the teacher asked, “How many siblings you have?” After some thought she said, “Sixteen.” Then teacher said, "I want to meet your mother." What my daughter did is she counted all her cousins because all the first cousins were like her real 5 brothers and sisters. She had only one brother, but she said 16 including her extended family. When I asked her, “How come you said 16?” She counted everybody. I said, “Okay I understand.” So, that kind of family background I come from, I don't want to take too much time. But one thing which was very important, that all of us got educated, even with my father's sickness and when the money wasn't there, because my mother made sure that our education is not to be interrupted. In India, you may have heard that gold is very important. A lot of gold is given to the daughters at the time of wedding. It used to be, it still is in some cases, and that was kind of a reassurance or kind of insurance, for survival in hard times; women can rely on their jewelry. I can tell you, my mother made use of her jewelry, very wisely kept all of us in the schools selling this jewelry when money was short and never regretted it. I come from a large family. Eight brothers and sisters. Now only three are living, but we grew up together. Somebody asked my mother, “How come you had such a big family? She was very quick in her reply, “There were no pills there at that time.” So, the person who was questioning kept quiet. Which was true at that time with families, and also because child mortality rate was very high in India. So, people will have more children. My older brother is a doctor, two of my brothers are engineers, one is an artist, and one is a college professor. My mother made sure everybody got education. I'm very thankful to her, even though she is not with us anymore. 6 KH: With high school ending at 10th grade, by the time you got to college, were they pretty integrated? PK: No. There were girls’ schools and the boys’ school. After independence in 1947, things changed, there were some co-educational schools, too. But I went to an all-girls school, and also, after 10th, what you call 11th and 12th grade, in India, they called “intermediate,” and then you go for the bachelor’s degree. So, it's four years, or six years and then two years for master’s, and then PhD. KH: Were the colleges where they integrated at that point? PK: Some were, not all. KH: What about the one that you went to? PK: It was all girls. All girls, and I enjoyed it. I had a lot of company and most of the teachers were also women teachers, but there were some men also. That's where actually, my vision changed. I was 14 years old when I left home and stayed in Allahabad, so I learned the value of education; whenever I missed my family, I said, “I'm here for learning, better do well,” so I concentrated on the education. Things are very different now. Please don't compare India from 50s to India today. But some things are still the same. In some smaller cities you will see segregated schools for women and men. Boys’ school, and girls’ school. KH: What started your interest in literature? PK: You know, my mother was a big reader. She didn't read English. She read in Hindi, our language. But she was always reading novels and magazines. My older sister was a big reader too. I was also, we were all readers because there 7 was no television, we read the books. So, one magazine will come by mail and three of us will jump, “Who gets it first,” because the one who gets it first reads it. Perhaps that’s why literature always fascinated me, but the choice when I made it in the high school was kind of random. I said, “I want to study literature.” History was also one of my favorite subject. I was also interested in languages. Sanskrit is the ancient language of India, and I started learning Sanskrit in ninth grade and loved it. KH: Wow. PK: Because that was an option, you had to select some subjects. I was always fascinated how the language is developed and since I was a child I thought, “Ohh! That would be interesting to me.” That's how it became my major and I enjoyed it because in BA I had all three literature: Hindi, Sanskrit and English as my focus. In India you focus on two or three subjects of study as your major subjects, and then there is a compulsory subject for BA. KH: How is the education system different between India and the US, when you were in school? PK: You know, I can only say about US education when I came here and my children went to school. So, correct me if the system was different, and I'm sure it was different in 50s and 60s. But still, in India the more concentration was on three Rs: what they called reading, writing and remembering, a lot of rote memory. In the lower grades, we had to memorize a lot of things. Sanskrit is a very structured language, grammatically very structured. It has the conjugations and all the grammatical rules that we had to memorize. There were exams, monthly 8 exams, six monthly exam and the final exam. It was not like here that you pass one semester and then you move to another. The school year there went from July to next May. Summer vacation was May and June because it was really hot at that time also. So, if you are in ninth grade, you stay in ninth grade. If you are in 10th grade, you stay in 10th grade for the whole school, academic year. You have the same teachers (sometimes the teachers will change), but the progression of the course work will be continuous. In a way, it was a good thing. Some say it was a bad thing because if you come to school every day and you did well on the monthly exams, six monthly, but you are not do well in the final exam. Then your grade would suffer. Final exam was the final grade. But it was not bad also, you prepared for that because that's what you are conditioned to do. KH: What degrees and certifications do you have? PK: I have my bachelor's degree from Allahabad University, my master's degree from Rajasthan University, and my second master's from the University of Utah, after many years of gap. KH: What were some of the challenges you faced while obtaining your degrees? PK: In India, I felt the challenge of staying away from my immediate family, which was not easy at that age. But every time I missed my family, I remembered why I am here. So, it was kind of a motivation also to study more and be more diligent and make them proud, don't make them worry about my education. When I came to America, the change was obvious. 9 When we moved to Utah, I realized that my areas of study (Hindi and Sanskrit) are not going to help me find a job. Because no university in Utah had Indian languages at that time, is still very rare. I wanted to stay in teaching, I love teaching. I was teaching in India also. Therefore, I went for another degree with comparative literature so I can be qualified to teach here. When I went to my classes here, I found that the system was very relaxed and open. Students and teacher’s relationship was very casual. In India teachers are very respected. If they enter the classroom, everybody stands up. Here at the University of Utah at that time, the smoking was allowed and the professor walks in and some students are still smoking and I was shocked. They will call professors by the first name instead of doctor so-and-so. Teachers are very respected in India. They are not called by first name. So, there were some social differences. But I liked the system here in the sense that every member participated in the classroom. We could express ourselves, and we had a little bit more freedom. It was not as structured as it was in my time in India. Remember, there was a time difference when I finished my first degree and started another degree, almost 15 years. So, it was hard to go back after being a teacher, to go back to school as a student. KH: So, when you were teaching in India, were you teaching at the college level or the high school? PK: Yes, college level. I always taught at the college level, but I taught mostly Hindi literature or Sanskrit. My husband was in a government job which was transferable, so in India when he was transferred, we will move to another city, 10 and his was a federal job, so we moved all over in India. After two years, I had to make a choice either to stay with my job or move with my family. I decided to move with the family because I didn't want to live alone. So, I had to find another job. I was lucky enough to find a job, so I taught there most of the time. KH: What was your experience emigrating to the US or Canada? Whichever one you went to first? PK: Well, Canada, we only stayed for nine months. We came to Canada because my younger brother was there and he wanted us to stay with him. We decided to come to America, not when we were very young. We were married, we had children, and the reason we decided to come was because my brother was in Canada, who did his PhD from Northwestern, famous university in Illinois, and was teaching at University of Windsor. My husband's brother was also in Cleveland State finishing his PhD in economics, and he just started his job at Cleveland State. He came to India for a visit and he said, “Why don't you come?” My husband was in television. He wanted to do more studies. It was a family decision; it was not my decision because we had family responsibilities. My husband is the oldest son. In India, the oldest son has the most burden of the responsibility. His parents were living with us, when they had passed on at that time. We thought, “Why don't we come and he can do some study in mass media?” India was developing television to cover other areas. Raj (my husband) came to Kent State first. When he came, I was supposed to stay in India with the children. But my younger brother, who was in Windsor, Canada, he said, “Why do you want to stay there (India)? Come here and we can put the children in 11 school here.” So, that's the reason we came to Canada, and stayed with him for nine months till Raj finished his master’s degree, and then we moved to Kent, Ohio. When my husband finished his degree there, he got the job at Weber. We came to US in 1970, and then came to Weber in 1972 with his job for a year. Then we moved to Boise for a year because Weber’s position was for one year. But after one year, his department (communication department) called him again and said, “We want you to come back,” and since we liked Ogden. So kids and I, we all agreed. Boise at that time was not attractive enough. I don't know, now they say it's very good, but it was not for us. We loved Utah. When we were driving from Ohio, I remember when we came to Morgan in Echo Canyon, it was breathtaking; we just loved it. In India also, we lived in Kashmir, which is the northern part of India for four years. Mountains there are beautiful, it's so beautiful. Utah reminded us of that. We also moved because I wanted to go back to University of Utah. Boise didn't have any graduate program. We came back to Utah because of that. We really liked it here. KH: What was it like immigrating to the US? PK: See, you have to remember that there are different kind of immigration. Some are forced migration, some are chosen migration, some are migrations like we see at the border crossing, that the life in their country is so hard that they have to migrate. The US has so much opportunity in education we wanted to take advantage of and then go back. It was not a forced immigration. We were happy to come. The purpose was education and the purpose was to go back (possibly). For five years we were thinking about that, but then we decided to stay for 12 several reasons, partly because kids’ education and the life, and also partly lack of opportunities in India at that time, we decided to stay. So, it was a gradual transfer of values and lifestyle. But still it was hard, I must say we chose to migrate, but we didn't realize how hard it will be. First of all, you don't have the support of the extended family, even though I had some family here. And thank God that's what kept us mentally sound. We had the pride that we have to sustain ourselves and you know, the students get those stipends, how meager they are. You all can relate to that. We lived very frugally before I could get a job, even with the teaching job in Kent, I had to do a side job to supplement the income, because we had two children. So, we had all the living expenses. Now, I think back, they were so little, but still, at that time, we needed more money. Another adjustment was cultural adjustment, especially the dress. I'm dressed now in Western style and now I am comfortable in this. But when I came, I was used to wearing my saree, which are so different. You wear the sarees and put the red dot [bindi] on your forehead and so you are always the other. You are a foreigner and you felt like a foreigner. The food was different, so that was another adjustment. The living quarters, there was no household help. When in India, my husband and I were running the household, I had some household help cleaning home, the washing, etcetera. Here I was doing everything. So, that was a big adjustment. Climate was a big adjustment also. So, there were a lot of adjustments, but gradually because we wanted to stay here, all those were mitigated or adjusted. Children were happy. They liked 13 this school. So that was a big factor also for us to stay. By that time other family members were also coming to the US. We had quite a bit of family and friends here and we created our friends here also. Gradually we were more comfortable. But it took two, three, maybe five years to really feel comfortable. Food was different. I'm a vegetarian, and I'm a vegetarian who doesn't even eat eggs. I remember going to a restaurant, and waiters will look at me when I said, “I don't eat meat, I don't eat chicken, I don't eat fish and egg.” They’d say, “What would you eat?” Thank God, now things are so much easier for me, and for people like me. So many times, I will tell them, “Do you have a baked potato? You can bring a baked potato and salad,” and that was my food. It was a big adjustment, the food, weather, social integration, because I felt like “the other” and an outsider. My skin color is different, my accent is different (and I don't want to lose it). Personally, I want my identity. You have to make adjustment wherever you can. But in the beginning, it was hard. Gradually, it gets better and now, after so many years of living here, this is home. This feels like home, I have lived here more than anywhere else. You know Judy Elsley in the English department? She and I wrote a paper (and published it) about living between cultures. Because she's an immigrant from England. We both live in between two cultures. KH: Right. PK: And I'm from India, which England colonized for a long time. So, we were talking about it and then we wrote about how even in the immigration, certain immigrants 14 are privileged and certain immigrants are not privileged. Depends on the color of your skin, place you are coming back. So, some discrimination is there. Open or hidden. Even now, living here for more than 50 years, I am asked, “Where are you from?” When I say, “I'm from Ogden, Utah.” “No, no.” I said, “You want to know where originally I am from?” So, I rephrase the question because I know they are not trying to put me down, but they don't know how to ask the question. Everybody's from somewhere. But if your skin is like yours, white [points at Kandice], you are not asked that question. If it is skin like me, I'm asked that question. So, the conflict between the other and being the person who belongs here, is a struggle for all immigrants. Therefore, you had to suffer that. But it makes you stronger, I think. KH: Do you feel like the community accepted you and your family easily as you were moving from place to place? KH: By and large, yes. But again, I have to qualify that we have privilege of moving in the community of a university. So called educated people, so called well-read people who know about others, and who will not openly discriminate or put you down. The university was really a salvation for us. They accept us; how much the local people accepted, it was gradual. To this day, I don't know how much they accept us, but we are here and we are not going to go away. Even though they will ask, “Where did you come and what is your plan?” This is home and I'm here. It takes a little while to get used to it, but the more educated circles you move, the 15 easier it is. That's why the university was a very good place for us to be here. Also, there are diverse cultures here. So they are not so shocked to see somebody whose color of skin is different than their own. It's an adjustment not for us only, but for my children and grandchildren also who are born here. Because of their names, their features genetically, even though they are half Indian now. My daughter is married to a Caucasian. There is still dark shade because of that, some pigmentation is more dominant. Black or brown is more dominant, so you can see that. They will still be asked, “Where are you from?” sometime. I don't know that they are. That's their issue, I am okay with it. Utah was very different because there were very few Indians here. When we moved here, the university had only two—my husband was a third professor from Indian origin. Doctor Seshachari, Doctor Reddy and then Doctor Raj Kumar, and I joined later, but we were the third family in the Ogden area. Now there are so many. A fewer number in Ogden, but Salt Lake City is full of Indian immigrants. So, Utah has changed over the years also. 70s Utah and the Utah of 2023 is very different. [Laughs] Yeah. So maybe it comes easy. KH: Okay. So, what was Weber like when you started? PK: Weber was four-year college; we came to Weber College. It became university after we joined. My husband came in ‘72 and then ‘74 we came back from Boise. Ever since we have stayed. When he joined in ‘72, I think it had an enrollment of 7,000 students. When we came back, it was 10,000, and just other day, we have now 30,000. There were four buildings. I don't know, you guys are so young. 16 Number One, Two, Three, Four. Those were the original buildings, and Social Science building was there, and the Browning Center, but not in this present form. KH: Right. I wasn’t here with the arches, but I wish… PK: Yeah, I remember arches. So, my husband's office was there, the Department of Communication was there. English department was always in Social Science. We didn't have a building. Elizabeth Hall came later. Now, campus has really changed. It was a smaller campus. In some ways, it was more cohesive also, because total faculty was like 70-75. So we knew each other better. There was at that time, which was a long title, the Faculty Women's Association, that was basically meant for the wives who were not working at that time. It was dismantled later on. Because there were very few women faculty, I think none were on the administrative positions. For female faculty, this was a very different place. And it stayed like that for a long time. I have seen a lot of changes and I am so happy for today and I hope it will keep progressing. It has progressed, has many more majors. There was no master’s program, only there were some associate degrees and certificates and four-year degree. Then it became university and we started some master’s program. Weber was very small and I was told that it was even smaller before that. I am sure you know the history of Weber. KH: What was the English department like when you started, and what was it like by the time you retired? 17 PK: Oh, gosh. English department was representative of that time, in the sense the female faculty were there, but patriarchy was entrenched. It was male dominated mostly. It was very traditional in coursework. Maybe I should separated it, maybe I should say what the curriculum was like and what the faculty was like. The faculty was mostly male. There were some women professors, like Doctors Carol, Mildred Miya and Neila Seshachari. She came later and was with my contemporary and Doctor Nikki Hansen, who were not treated very well. The reason was that female faculty were not really valued, they were hired, but not heard much. They could say the same thing in the department meeting and nobody would pay attention, but if the same thing is repeated by a male mouth it got the attention. This is just a general example. I'm going to be frank about it because there was no way a female faculty in the English department could be the department chair at that time, and I'm so glad that I have lived to see the first female department chair, who is my good friend Doctor Kathy Herndon. So, now you can see the difference that now our campus is very diverse. It was very focused on the white male concept. Even if you are the faculty member, female faculty were asked, “You don't need the benefits because you have a husband to support you.” You're doing the same job, but you will be paid less, much less, as much as a $10,000 difference. I mean, you feel how could it happen? But it was, because salaries were not declared and were negotiated. It all changed because of some students who forced the legislature to release the salaries, to bring some equity, but it was not there at that time. All the important courses were given to select few, and we all had to teach composition. I love 18 teaching composition. I taught all that time. But I think there were disparities, big disparities at that time. At that time, coursework offered were very Euro-centered. Shakespeare, of course, and Bible as a literature. Even the current American literature was not represented well. Nineteenth century or the contemporary and diverse writers were not included; it was very traditional. We had major and minor in English. There was no ESL and there was no any other avenue. Technical writing was not there. But gradually these developed and I'm very proud of English department that they have changed gradually as English department. They hired good, qualified faculty from outside also. At first the faculty were mostly Mormon dominated. I'm not saying this for any other reason than just stating the fact. Sometimes the faculty meetings were like the church meetings because it was very much Mormon dominated. English department progressed and became much better over the years. They hired the different faculty, more female faculty who came from outside and brought the changes. Male faculty, people like my good friend Doctor Michael Wutz, John Schubert, Doctor Gary Doher were all outsiders, and Katheen Herandon. They brought their expertise and English department became very diverse gradually. That's why I feel so privileged that I witnessed and participated in it as it changed a lot. Women writers were not represented. Forget the Black writers, or Latino writers or Indian writers. Kathy and I were the first ones to include the writers of color in the curriculum, and insisted that inclusivity is necessary and fought for it. 19 Some faculty members were not happy. They will say, “Oh, this is a fashion of the day. It will die down.” We were not favored for doing that. But fortunately, we prevailed. They did not discourage us to experiment and be inclusive. So, I am thankful for that and very happy about that. Now the coursework is varied. Classes are offered in so many different areas. I am really impressed by the English department today. I'm taking a class and sitting in a class (Dr. Wutz's honors class) about fiction and film. KH: Oh, wow. That sounds like an interesting class. PK: Yeah! It's so interesting. I taught a class about novels into film, so that's my interest. But this class is wonderful. Now we have so many different courses. So many choices. It was not there before. English Department is really a vibrant department now with a lot of energy and a lot of creativity, which it should be. Creative writing, people are here, and it's very good. KH: So, what did a typical semester look like for you? PK: Because I was an instructor, we all have to teach composition classes. I had two composition classes, one intro to literature and one specialty class each semester. Sometime two composition and two specialty if I was lucky. I'm not putting down composition classes because in some big universities professors don't teach composition because the graduate students teach it. The beauty and a big difference of Weber is that professors who are well trained teach those classes (freshman classes). For me personally, it is very rewarding. I also taught in the remedial English. I don't know, maybe the developmental English is the correct word. The people who are not up to the par, they can take those courses 20 and you see the difference in the students’ mind opening and learning. That's the reward for teaching. Normal load for each semester was four courses, which was a heavy course load, especially with all the gradings. Teaching is fun, but grading is not so much fun [laughs], but necessary. You see the progress in the students. That's the most rewarding thing, because those same students would come after three or four years, they've gone through your class and then come back and say, “You remember me? Now I'm a lawyer, I am a doctor.” That's the reward. It was a lot of work, but it was rewarding work and I always enjoyed. That's how we can bring the change in the curriculum also. Even in the composition classes, we changed the curriculum as we brought the multicultural, multi-ethnic, multifaceted literature to our students. KH: So, you mentioned that when you first started teaching and you tried bringing that multicultural facet to the classroom, it wasn't accepted very well. How long did it take for others to catch on to what you were doing and see the value? PK: It's very hard for me to see that, really how long it took, and I don't know how many people are doing it, but it was accepted and it was valued. We were two or three people. Kathy and me and Gary, we were three or four people who believed in that. Then Judy came and joined us. We just wanted to open up the canon and open up the world of literature, because English is a language which is the most spoken language in the world. Most English literature right now is coming from the people whose first language is not English. So, to concentrate on the European and British or American literature is not fair to the English 21 literature. I'm not undervaluing that. I'm saying that in addition, we need to include and be more inclusive. The people who are writing in English as a second language or first language or third language, but they are contributing to the literature. There were very few women writers included. Some people still asked why should they include any women writers. We asked, “Why not include women authors?” Somebody had to say, “Hey, I'm here. Bring me to the table, or I am already at the table. Count me in.” So that was the hard part. People in the department meetings would comment, “Oh, you guys are doing experimental things. It will die down.” I said, “Okay, good, it will die down, because in time it will become the mainstream.” We don't have to push it, just acknowledge it, because we should represent America as America is with best of its qualities. So, it was very new idea and hard to sell, but we had the support from the curriculum committee. We had the support from the department chair. We also had the support from the dean. Otherwise, it wouldn't be possible. You know the process and I must add the department chairs also gave us the freedom to do it. We were following that same curriculum, only changing the readings, bringing more variety in the readings. I was the first one to introduce non-Western writers in my course of world literature, which was a very important course. For majors, it is a required course. But world literature was only limited to the European and American literature. So, I introduced a class, World Literature with Non-Western Writers. There are so 22 many African writers, Chinua Achebe, Nadine Gordimer, and they’re already writing in English. It’s English literature. There are non-Western writers that are there like Garcia Marquez, Isabel Allende. These people should be included. So, my department said, “Okay, you can teach it. If the class goes, it’s experimental.” It went and thanks to the students who loved it. So now there are still some professors who are teaching world literature with this perspective and including more diverse writers. I'm very happy for that. Students were eager to learn about other people, this was not student's fault. They were happy. Then I thought, “There is no course on Asian woman writers.” Asian women are writing and Asia is a big, big continent, so you can't include everybody. So at first I experimented with some writers from China, Japan, and India. I know that also is kind of a very vast literature. I had that course, and then I created one course for Indian women writers. There are so many Indian women writers writing in English, not in translation, because there are a lot of Indian women writers in India. India has 14 languages (regional languages). So, they were not represented. Thanks to the students, they loved it, and by that time we had the women's studies curriculum being developed. So, my courses were cross-listed with that and I did not feel resistance because that was a specialized course and enrollment was always good. If I didn't have students, the course would not be there. Students are the life and soul of the classroom. Even after retirement I taught my special courses, because my department asked me to. Course offerings are so varied now and so much better in English 23 department than it was before. It was very narrowly focused. I loved teaching new classes. Another one was a film course, we develop this film course also, Kathy and I, and because there's so much correlation between the medium, different mediums have different focus. It was a popular class. And we taught that for several years. I'm glad some people are still doing it. There were challenges, but not that we did not anticipate or we could not handle them. There was support also. There were people who were very supportive. KH: So, you mentioned the Women's Studies program. Would you talk about what it took to develop and get into that? PK: That can be an interview by itself. I am so proud of being part of that, even though I'm a small part of it. I'm not the whole, but I am a small part. That was perhaps the most rewarding thing which we did. We went from the questions like “What is women's studies? Why? Why do you need women's studies?” to accepting that women's studies deserve to be taught, and now it's called gender studies, which is perfectly fine. Thanks to some of the faculty outside the English department also. The one good thing about Weber is that female faculty, at least in my experience, were very innovative and connected. We will reach out to each other, we met each other, we had a kind of a friendship, camaraderie. We had many professors, like Kathryn MacKay, Nancy Haanstad, Gloria Wurst, Sandra Powell, working together and we were all pushing for it and the dean at that time was supporting us. It took us almost two years or more to convince that we can have a program. Why that program? Even though I wish that we had more support, but 24 we had to defend it in the faculty senate, and we had to show that there are issues we can teach. They’d comment, “What were you going to teach in women study?” As if women have nothing to contribute. We had to make a joint effort. We did have cohorts. We had a group of women faculty and some administrators who met and strategized about how to propose and what to include. Finally, we got the approval for that. It was a minor, still is a minor. I wish it could be a major now, it should be a major. That brought a lot of friendships in my life. Lot of support, a lot of real connection of likeminded people which made life much better. Women's studies is a very important and very dear part of my life in Weber. I'm so happy that I was a little part of that too. When we got the approval, first in the library, I don't know if anybody remembers Carol Hanson. She was a librarian and she was a well-traveled person. She and I got together, and she was also part of the women’s studies. We organized a retreat in Park City. We wrote the grant and got the grant. Money is so important. Then, she and I, we brought the scholars for women's studies and invited two people from each school, at least, one male and one female faculty. We had a retreat in Snowbird for three days that was very impactful. Those experts were able to really answer the question, what you can teach and what scholarship means in women's studies, because these were the scholars. Even then, there are people who are a little unconvinced, but that goes with all change. We created a film series on women's issues, Carol Hansen and I did that and we showed it. There were a lot of good responses for that. We had 25 lectures by scholars. We could afford that because we wrote the grant and got the Hemmingway Grant. I had received six or seven Hemmingway Grants because the department doesn't have money, so you have to depend on a grant. When women’s study became a reality, it was very satisfying. Still, I feel that it should be a compulsory course. The introduction to women's studies should be required, I think now it became a required course, but I'm not sure. Even after retirement, I was asked to teach this class because I loved that course. This program changed many minds, it supported the faculty, staff and students. So, it was economically, socially, emotionally a very big move, but an essential move for Weber State. Women's studies is still very important for me, and it will always remain important. I still belong to the group that we started for women’s studies, because we wanted to learn too, all the feminist theory and other aspects of it. We used to meet in somebody's house. There were men faculty and women faculty both, and we had the articles to read and discuss and understand. That group is still going on. We are not reading those theories, but we are still reading the books written by women and I am part of it. We meet every month. I think this is one of the oldest book group; for more than 30 years we have been together. And again, I gained social and emotional support from my friends and have made lifelong friendships with all these women and men. Some men, but most are women. Women's study is very important for me. KH: What are some of your favorite memories at Weber State? 26 PK: Hard to specify. Let me categorized in two: (1) academically, (2) socially. Because Weber is my social life also. Weber is my academic field also. We are still very much part of the University (Raj and I). We still come to the gym, we still go to the lectures, we still go to the library, we still go to the concerts and all that because that's social life for us. Weber is the center of our life. Our memories of Weber are very good, in the sense the whole academic atmosphere was friendly overall. Very friendly. One thing I must say about people in Utah in general is that they may not understand you, but they welcome you. They are generous people. People have misgivings about Mormon culture outside of Utah: the Mormons are this and that, and the stereotypes abound. But we have found that we fit in, even though I am still a Hindu. But I like the value system because for us also, the family is very important. Two of the reasons Raj and I stayed here: one is the cultural atmosphere, even though we were not part of the church or mainstream. Our children may have had some discrimination in school. We did not suffer it at the university, not obviously because we were included. The second is the family values, living the life the best you can, always doing your best, those are two things which I like. That time in 70s, Utah didn't have that much drug problems too. But now things have changed. We thought, this is a very good place to raise a family because we come from the similar backgrounds, values our culture, Indian culture, also in cahoots with these values. 27 Utah was very good for us, and Weber especially. It was very good for me to have a social circle, because we did not have our family here. Our relatives were/are here in America, but they were/are in New York, Connecticut, Chicago, not in Utah. We made good friends because of Weber. I remember there used to be a convocation speech every Thursday, and other lecture series library used to arrange. We heard top writers, thinkers, and we made a point that we should have no class between 12 and 1. I will walk to the Browning Center and listen. I mean, they had wonderful guest speakers. We heard Ronald Reagan here, Robert Redford, Shirley Chisholm, the first female black presidential candidate, and Bella Abzug, the feminist. We used to get such good speakers and that was very interesting for us. The Utah Symphony comes to Weber. We love music, Indian music as well as Western music. We always had the season tickets for that. We heard Itzhak Perlman, Pinky Zukerman, and other top artists right here in Ogden, Utah. So, Utah is a hidden gem, and Weber State is part of it or center of it. We are so fortunate to have this facility this close. Now, this Thursday the symphony is playing Beethoven, next is Audra McDonald. If you go to Broadway then you’d spend thousands of dollars, and you can attend them at Weber for much less money. KH: Right. PK: We are going to attend those program. Those things made our lives richer for us. It is not just a job, but the cultural ambiance. People don't realize that how much cultural activities we have here. Salt Lake is more valued, Ogden is devalued or 28 undervalued in the sense I think they have not treated Ogden very well, and especially Weber State. People don't realize that how much Weber State is diverse and values cultural things. Therefore, I'm very happy for staying here. Research shows that in the old age, if you stay in a university community, your mind would be active, and that is very important for us. I think the best memories are attending these concerts, lectures, plays. We also love theater. Our theater department is excellent. We have participated in everything which college/university offered. We have lifelong friendship, this is our home, all of our friends, close friends, most of them, are part of Weber State University. Some are gone, and some are retired. We have good memories for that. Therefore that's given us a home. We immigrated but we assimilated here in our hearts, and people let us do it. So, I'm very grateful for that. It's very good to be here. It's hard to summarize what Weber means to us. That's our life. That's our center which focuses us. So, wherever we go, who knows? Now, we have lived most of our lives here, and I don't care, now what happens, it’d be fine. KH: What do you view as your greatest accomplishment or accomplishments? PK: I don't think about it. I should be modest. I should not be bragging about anything. It's hard to say what is the greatest accomplishment. Again, I should separated it academically and socially. Academically, I am very proud that I was part of more inclusive curriculum, diverse curriculum, and more opening of class offerings and more inclusive of the women's literature from other countries. That's my pride and my satisfaction that I was a little part of it. 29 Again, as I said, I'm not the main player, but I was a player in the women's studies and gender studies, which I think is an essential one of study. I feel all male and female students should take and realize the equality and the conflicts and issues and how to mitigate them. I think that's a very good minor. Your education should be mind opening, not closing of the mind. We have to open our minds. These courses, these classes just bring you diverse perspective, makes you think that students come as a young mind which need to be guided and opened. They don't have to be convinced if they don't like it, they don't have to take it, but they should have an option to do so. I think I am very proud that I have a small part in that. Well, socially, we participate in most of the social things here, Weber/Utah issues. I'm not a political person, but I like the changes which are coming and we need to have more. Some of the issues are still going backward sometimes, which is disheartening. But it's a kind of a two-way traffic. I learned a lot. We learned a lot from the students and with everybody; I hope we contributed something to the community. In the beginning, I remember in 70s, the 80s, I mean, there were so many groups who will ask me to come and talk about India because people wanted to know. And I never said no. I will just go and talk about India and make them realize that how diverse, how different India is and break the stereotypes down. Stereotypes have maybe some value somewhere, but in my mind they don't have value. You have to see the individual as a person. I did those lectures, those community service project (you can call it whatever). There are a lot of ladies’ 30 social groups that invited me, and I always went to just educate them about my culture. My daughter when she first came and she said she is from India, in her class in first grade, her classmates who were six, seven years old said, “Which tribe?” She comes home and say, "Ma, which tribe we are?” She didn't have the answers and I said, “What are you talking about?” She told me that somebody asked her which tribe you are? I said, “Okay, we are not Native Americans. We are Indians from India.” I got the map and next day I said, “Okay, you take this and tell your class we are from this country, this is the country of India, and I'm Indian from Asia.” She went happily and told her teacher and then explained to the students in her class. The child who asked her didn't mean anything bad, but they needed to be educated. So, that is something which I see as a positive impact of other people coming in the country. Utah was very different in 70s, I stopped wearing the sarees because that made me always “the other,” and I was teaching English and people would say, “How did you learn English?” They don't know the history of India. In India there was 200 years of British Empire. We all learnt English. That is a compulsory language. We don't learn one language; we learn three languages. You have to. In Europe people switch from French, to German, to Spanish, no big deal. India has 14 regional languages. It’s a diverse country, and all 14 languages have literature. I taught one class in Indian literature in translation and one where was literature written in English because they are two different genres. These are the 31 things which I think are really valuable, and I feel that I have contributed a little bit to that. I'm trying to do it at least. KH: Are there any other committees or projects you'd like to talk about that you have been a part of? PK: On campus? KH: Yes. PK: Oh yes, women's studies was one, and second one was the diversity committee. If you remember there was no diversity committee, there were no diversity issues long back. Doctor Forrest Crawford, my good friend, he was the first assistant to the president for diversity. And why? Because some of us made sure that we need to bring more diversity to the campus. How do you do that? By making aware people that we need some more voices, diverse voices, other issues. I was part of that first initial committee of the diversity on campus. It was appointed by the president; I was part of that. Also included, diversity conference. After three years of that committee, diversity conferences started. That is also kind of something innovative that came from that committee, and I'm so pleased that I was a part of it. I was member of the curriculum committee also. I was on a faculty vitality committee. The outcome of these committees’ works were very good. That gave me a chance to move from a department to the college committees. You always have to have work on department committees, but then my involvement became campus wide. I made connections outside the department, outside our school. It was my privilege and my benefit, and maybe I contributed to all of them, and I'm 32 happy that I was part of the president's committee on the women's gender studies when we started the program. I was also part of friends of library committee. That group doesn’t exist now, but Mrs. Thomson, Carolyn Thompson was the one who started that. The whole storytelling festival was the brainchild of that. It started on campus with the education department, and then it had moved to the community. We became part of it, and in that committee I insisted that we need to focus on the stories from outside the country. So, we had a session (now maybe they don't have that), but we had a session of stories from different languages and cultures. Doctor Jeanne Miller in French department, I and Mary Rosa from Spanish language department were part of it. We will speak in the original language first and then we will do the translation for children. We also published a book together, “Twice Told Stories.” Those stories were the traditional stories. We didn't invent the stories. They were like the stories we heard in our childhood, or famous French story or famous Spanish story. We would bring props to the storytelling festival. We told the stories in both languages. It was for second or third grade students. We did that for many years, and I enjoyed that. That was very good experience. I was on that committee also. Now the festival has grown so much, and I'm happy about it. KH: When did the diversity committee start, do you remember? PK: It should be in my papers. I think it started, I want to say late 80s, but I'm not sure about the timeline. Yeah. That was the recommendation of our diversity committee that we should have an assistant to the president. There was no vice 33 president of diversity, only assistant to the president. Doctor Forrest Crawford was the first one who was appointed. We made sure that all the students have some way to connect with the current issues they are facing and have some mentor to guide them. That was a beginning, and I'm so happy that they are still here. Now we have a vice president of diversity. Unfortunately, Adrian has left. But I hope that department will sustain. Adrian is a good friend of mine, she always came to my class and I get to be a guest lecturer to her classes. There are a lot of faculty who are very open minded about diversity, so they should be supported. We are going through a difficult time right now. It’s a different time. I think some kind of backlash is going on. Some people are saying we should close our borders. I don't think that once the doors are open, it can be closed. I am hopeful. KH: Me too. PK: I'm very hopeful. I sometimes feel dejected, but I say, “No this will come back, it will soon be back.” We had a lot more support for diversity and inclusivity. We had the program; we hired some professors for two years. Doctor Robert Smith was academic vice president, it was his brainchild that these lectureship were only for the diverse faculty to attract them to Utah. If they like, for two years, then they can continue to teach. There are several faculty, I will not name them but there are several faculty members who are hired in that program because that's one way to attract people to Weber State. Some people come from out of state and they don't culturally adjust to Utah. It is a hardship. Utah is very good, but sometimes people can be 34 judgmental, especially the younger people with younger children. Some professors of color faced that their children were discriminated in school and part of this is ignorance because they don't know better. The children learn from their parents. Our diversity committee was to encourage more faculty to come and encourage them to teach more courses that emphasize and value other cultures and literatures. That was a good idea. I hope it continues. KH: I hope so too. PK: I hope so too, and women’s studies I hope the same way. KH: So, you've mentioned some of the books and articles that you've written. What other topics have you written about? PK: I have a chapter in this book, "Women Faculty of Color in the White Classroom". I wrote about my experiences of teaching in Utah and the title of my chapter is “Yellow Lotus in White Lilly Pond, An Asian American Woman Teaching in Utah.” In this I talk about the pluses and minuses of teaching in Utah as an Asian American woman. I have written and published with Judy an article, “Living Between Cultures.” I’ve also written the short stories and memoir in Weber magazine. I write mostly personal experiences. This one is about my mother. When she passed away, I wanted to offer her a tribute. She was an amazing woman who never completed her formal education, but she was educated in the best sense of word “education.” That was published here, and also, I write mostly academic papers presented at various conferences internationally. I traveled internationally, presented paper at Heidelberg, Germany; Montreal, Canada; Singapore, and several other places. Mostly I did 35 academic or personal writing. I didn't do any other kind of writing. We had a writing group also on our campus. I belonged to the writing group and mostly did personal writing. KH: Okay, what recognition have you received for your accomplishments? PK: The biggest recognition is when your past students see you in the grocery store and come, “You don't remember me, but I was your student and I loved your class.” That's the best accomplishment and acknowledgment, from the students. I was fortunate enough to receive six Hemingway Faculty Vitality Awards. I was also nominated as the Best Teacher, and Friends of the Student, by Crystal Crest. I was nominated and secured “Friends of the Students Award.” Local YCC, which is the organization in Ogden, awarded me the “Spirit of American Woman Award.” I received it for higher education. That was very satisfying. KH: When did you retire from Weber? PK: Officially, I retired in 2000. Unofficially, 2017. Unofficially means I was retired, but certain courses that my department wanted or the women's studies wanted me to teach, and I would teach them for one semester as a part-time instructor. I first started as a part-time teacher, then became full time, and then after retiring became part-time again. So, I made a full circle. I taught the introduction to gender studies, which I loved. They were kind enough to ask me, my classes were very full, and nice, very rewarding. Indian women writers’ class, I taught several times, and then I taught this class on film and novels because that was very much in demand. Co-taught with Kathy Herndon. It was so much fun. So, I taught till 2017 not full time, just part time. 36 We travel a lot, so I didn't want to impede or miss all the travel. I retired for two reasons. One is that grandchildren were born, and I wanted to help my daughter. She travels a lot for her work. She is an anthropologist and worked for MacArthur Foundation. She was traveling internationally more, so I retired to help her take care of the baby if she needed. Now in 2017, I said, “Okay, I am 80. Now I need to take leave from teaching.” KH: That's fair. PK: But I still like to come here. We both come here for lectures and I like to sit in classes. So, I'm a student now. KH: Which is great. Learning is the best part, right? PK: Yes, a very rewarding part. Yeah, that's right. KH: When did your husband retire? PK: He retired two years after me in 2002. 1972 we came here and taught, 2002. He taught in the communication department. After retirement, we concentrated on our travel. We both love traveling, so we traveled a lot, almost 50 countries. KH: That's amazing. PK: Well, we did it because when your health is good and you can do it. Now we are concentrating more on, domestic travel, not much international. But we do take some international cruise. But it's getting harder to travel long distance now. My husband did not teach part time after he retired. He said, “I'm not coming back.” But I still came back and taught for English department or women's studies whenever they were nice enough to ask me. I did enjoyed it. It was good because then I didn't have the committee work and other responsibilities. 37 KH: Yes, that is nice [laughs]. PK: Teach a class and I go back. Didn't get paid much, but that was not the point. KH: What mentors or resources did you have available to you in your career? PK: Sometime there were more mentors, but sometimes there were lack of mentorship, I must say. Because sometimes there are more adversaries than supporters. I don't look at my time at the University of Utah graduate program very favorably. I was supposed to do my PhD there, but it was my decision that I decided to drop out of it. Part of reason was the adversary atmosphere at the U of U, especially for women of color. I was admitted to the PhD, but after a year I said, “I can't stand it.” So, once I had completed the master’s degree coursework, I said, “I am out,” and I regret that. But at that time it was emotionally not good for me and for my family. I was traveling every day to Salt Lake and I didn't get any mentors there. Actually, my advisor was a male chauvinist, if I can call him now, and he was very hard on female students, all of them, but especially to me. So that was bad mentorship. When I was in high school in India, I had good teachers. I had a couple of teachers who just took me under their wings and helped me. They encouraged me to study hard. I remember them fondly, but at that time I was lonely and missing my family. So, they became like a support system. University of Utah was not that supportive at that time. When I came to Weber and joined the English department, I liked it very much. The other female faculty and some male 38 faculty too were very supportive, some of them were my mentors and support system. You can say that is mentorship and support system for me. Women's studies is good for the student, but it was good for me also, because I reached out of my limited circle and became part of a bigger group. I'm so proud of that now we have so many deans who are female. When the first female dean came to WSU, we celebrated, and now I feel so happy and proud. The faculty from all other departments were very supportive. Faculty support and colleagues were very helpful friends and are my lifelong friends now. KH: And how have you been a mentor to others? PK: I don't know. I won't answer that question. Not specifically, but all the students who came to my class and needed help, my door was always open and they felt comfortable. I remember guiding some students, especially a couple of female students who were in a domestic violence situation. One of them just broke down and I just said, “Calm down,” and then connected her with the counselor and took her to the counselor. Students sometimes don't know that there are some facilities and help available to them free of charge. She was ready to drop out. But then she continued, graduated, and then she did invite me to her graduation. So indirectly, maybe I have encouraged more students because I always gave them positive feedback. If they needed help, I was always there to help. Because that's all you can do as a teacher. Be compassionate, be helpful, direct them in the right direction. I don't have all the answers, but I know where the resources are. I send them to the right direction. 39 That's all I have done. I always tell them that follow your passion, do what you love to do. Don't listen to all the other people who saying, “You can't do math, you can't do science, or you should do this or you shouldn't do that.” Don't listen to them. I gave that kind of a lesson indirectly or directly, I have always given my students encouragement. You can call it mentorship or whatever. KH: What advice would you give to students starting in either academic education— well working in higher education or in literature? PK: I would say follow your passion. You have to love what you do. Sometimes people discourage you and sometimes it's a practical thing. Some people say, “What are you going to do with this degree? You are not going to get a job. You are not going to go earn money.” Of course, literature is not going to make you a millionaire. (There are some people who are good writers are millionaires). I'm not saying that, but they are very few. But if you are passionate about it, I always will say follow your heart and mind and go with it. There is no point doing your job halfheartedly or where you are not really fully enjoying it. You don't have to be a computer analyst if you are not made out for that. So, there are different jobs for different people. Follow your heart, follow your passion. Be truthful to yourself. When I was doing the second master’s, everybody was saying, “Why are you doing in literature again, do in something else so you can get a better job.” I said, “I am not going to do it for a job, but I want to love what I am doing. I am not going to be rich teaching English, but I am going to be happy.” For me that inner peace and inner happiness is more important than the things of the outer periphery. I am not decrying the money, and I am not saying that people 40 who go on the computer are bad, but that's their passion and they want to do it. They can do it. Whatever job you take, give your heart and soul to it. Immerse in it, and do your best. That's all you can do, and people will see it that you are doing your best. Be sympathetic, be kind, and be honest. If you don't know anything, acknowledge it. So many times in the class, I’ve said, “I will have to look it up,” fine. I'm not all-knowing, but be truthful and the people would trust you. That's very important for us. I'm not saying that you don't have to be strong. You have to be strong, but you have to realize where your heart is. Where is your value system? What is the most important thing for you? Then you stick with it. First, you have to be truthful to yourself, analyze yourself and then do what is right. Don't listen to everybody who discourages you. I will say, just follow your passion, that's the most important thing. In the end of the life as I am in the night now, I don't have regrets in the sense about anything; what I did I enjoyed thoroughly and I hope I gave something more to the people who wanted it, and I also received more. I received love and affection and satisfaction. So that's the kind of end result, I would say. Don't be swayed by others. Listen to your inner voice. Because that’s most times telling the truth. KH: That's good advice. PK: Yeah. I think a lot of people these days get a job and they're not happy with their jobs. I can't imagine, even though I think about it sometimes, grading so many student papers was hard work. I would get up early to do it. I enjoyed reading every word of their compositions. I could not skip it because somebody has 41 written it, giving all his/her time. I enjoyed it, I did not regret it. That's it. I'm happy what I have. Again, I have a kind of attitude. This is my attitude. Don't look at what others have, look at yourself, what you value. If you have that, you should be happy. Most important thing is the human values which we all say. It became a cliché, but that inner satisfaction is the most important thing. If you want a relationship, you have not hurt anybody, you have not caused trouble for everybody, then you are doing something right. In the end, that matters. So that's my advice will be, if somebody wants to take it. Most people do listen to their heart, and they should. My daughter was pre-med in the University of California at Berkeley, and she went with the whole idea then to become a doctor and this and that. Then one afternoon she calls say, “Ma, are you sitting down?” I said, “What?” My heart sank. Is there some bad news, is she dropping out of school? I said, “What?” “I'm changing my major.” I said, “Okay, to what?” “Anthropology.” It took me a minute and I said, “Do you really like it?” She says, “I love it.” She took one class from a Professor White, who was a world-renowned anthropologist at Berkeley, and she decided to become an anthropologist. I said, “Okay, if you really want it, fine with us.” She is an anthropologist now working for an NGO. Graduated from UNC, did her PhD, she did two 42 masters. One in public health and one in medical anthropology. Worked for WHO, worked for MacArthur, and now she's the CEO of a women's organization that’s working for reproductive health. She's happy. She followed her heart, and I'm happy. Nobody has to do what one’s heart doesn't want to do. That's some basic human condition. We want to do what we love to do and what we want. I hope I answered your questions. KH: You did. PK: If you have any suggestions or editorial things feel free to do that. KH: Okay. Well, is there anything else you'd like to share? PK: I just want to thank you for your patience. I hope I didn't bore you. KH: No, it was lovely. I loved it. PK: When you live that long, you have many stories accumulated in your head and heart [laughs]. I just want to appreciate and really admire your work that you are doing all this. Maybe it will help somebody and maybe not, but I'm honored that you asked me. So thank you again. KH: You are welcome, and thank you for your time. PK: Yeah. I'm very happy. KH: Great! I mean, I could talk to you for like another hour with all sorts of questions, but I don't want to take up the rest of your day. PK: I know you have a busy day too. You guys have a lot of work to do. I'm so happy too, the library looks so great. KH: Oh, good. PK: You should have seen the library in the 70s. 43 KH: I've seen pictures. PK: But we still loved it. But now, when I come, I am proud of it. That's one of the pleasures of living in the same place where you worked. That we come here, Raj and I say, “Oh, the campus is looking so good, really the campus is so beautiful.” Every time we are on campus we are happy because this is our home. This is a big part of our life. So, we are very happy about it. KH: I'm glad that you have such a connection to the campus still. That's amazing. PK: Yeah. That keeps us going. We have other social, a lot of social things and this and the library, the public libraries are good too. We live in South Ogden and Pleasant Valley Library, that's our lifeline. KH: Oh, I bet! PK: Everyday, other day, even in COVID, they were so good they would bring the books outside. So, the books are our life. I hope Sarah has put down mine, I give some books to Special Collections. KH: Yep. We added them to our collection. PK: Yeah. I have more to give. I have sorted them out. Thank you so much. KH: Yeah, thank you. 44