Saturday, February 20, 2010
Facebook thots
Friday, February 19, 2010
Thot on love and respect
Friday, August 28, 2009
Man on the prowl - Talk by Chandrahas Choudhuri
I finally ventured out of Gurgaon into the far faraway land of Delhi literati whose escapades, so far, I have followed only on their cross-linked blogs.
The event was a talk by Chandrahas Choudhuri, author of Arzee the Dwarf, who – along with Tarun, a friend, and Jai Singh – will always keep alive in me the fire of the shuddering realisation that there are people who’ve read more books in a year that I will ever read in a lifetime. Chandrahas is the excellent book reviewer from Mint and I’ve followed his blog without actually reading most of the books he reviews.
The talk was a British Council in Delhi, a place, as I discovered, just outside the Outer Ring of CP near the Statesman building. It took me a lot of time to get there and get the car parked. The building was very beautiful but like much of Delhi virtually inaccessible to a daily-wage earner from Gurgaon like me.
I entered the auditorium just as Chandrahas was beginning his talk after an introduction by someone called Mark that I’d missed.
A little about my expectations from the talk. I had read the first teaser chapter in the blog of the author and had not liked it very much. Coming as it did around the time I had skimmed through the disasters of ‘You are here’ by Meenaxi Reddy and ‘My friend Sancho’ (Earlier, the Sancho-author’s claim in an interview that his favourite author at ten was Dostovesky had put me in a depression – I graduated to Hardy Boys at twelve!) I was getting increasingly suspicious of bloggers turning authors.
I browsed a little more in Landmark (it might sound I browse there every day but it’s more like five times a year) and started liking it. First of all, it’s a novel – finally. And not an extended-blog of an ego-inflating exercise. The author has obviously chosen a story alien to his own self and it sticks. Being short and having a glorious personality is not as easy I make it seem; imagine being a dwarf. In an interview, the author talked about he saw a handsome dwarf once and thought if being good-looking at that height didn’t make things worse for you and therein lay the spark for the tale. I was surprised as the thought had occurred to me too a long time ago, tho’ no handsome dwarf fell on my head from the apple tree I ruminated under.
As I browsed through the first forty-odd pages of the book, I realised that it was a brave book since it ventured beyond the author’s own habitus and that whatever I have learned of forms and contents from my readings – though not a scratch on Chandrahas’ own expressions at the start of many of his reviews – the book performed very well on those fronts. I remember at which phrase I actually kept the book back on the shelf – a poet-driver telling Arzee ‘Requited love – that is the paradise raised from nothing but a pair of synchronized imaginations.’ I was put off by the too many words and especially the “synchronized.’ He’s talking about love – goddammit, I thought. Why not use something like ‘imaginations commingled’? Doesn’t ‘commingle’ replicate the angelic euphoria and the bells you hear within more than the mechanical ‘synchronized’, I thought. (I am not making this up – this is what I thought then.) Lyricism, for me, is very important in a novel. Something the greats like Dickens understood. Try reading his books aloud to yourself and you will understand.
My second reading of the book happened yesterday at LM. I had been sick for a couple of days and the fever broke yesterday. During this time, I had hardly eaten and I was craving for a Zinger burger meal. LM’s luck that it’s placed right next to a KFC on MG Road (Having a flat between LM and KFC is paradise for me – stuff love, requited or not.) Here, I finally decided that Arzee is a very good book indeed. The author, in successive chapters, throws light on some of the main characters, beside the protagonist, in a beautifully described Mumbai chawl-like building, where the protagonist’s thoughts range from almost falling dizzy with a temptation of suicide yawning under him as a hole to pathetic self-pity to a sudden pang for someone lost to falling in love with a voice – belonging, as he realises later, to a blind girl. All very credibly portrayed. And the best of authors can falter at this. A brilliant scene. The next scene, where the protagonist is clowning in a mall dressed as a Limzee bottle, starts with panache, as if the author is atoning for the almost grey morose tone, similar in texture to the building where most of the previous scene takes place, of the previous chapter.
‘All afternoon, a big green furry bottle – big for a bottle, that is, but small for a human being, which under the surface it undoubtedly was, since it walked on two legs, wildly waved two arms, and emitted a medley of squawks, neighs and moos, mixed with snatches of dialogue from movies and ululating calls of – ‘Auto! Auto!’ – a large green bottle had been scooting around the Inorbit Mall in the suburb of Malad, creating a stir.
A very good beginning to a paragraph as it is, I feel that the impact would have been more if the author had truncated it to this effect –
‘All afternoon, a big green furry bottle wildly waving two arms – and emitting a medley of squawks, neighs and moos, mixed with snatches of dialogue from movies and ululating calls of ‘Auto! Auto!’ – scooted on two short legs around the Inorbit Mall in the suburb of Malad, creating a stir.’
For even though, I started liking the book well enough to thinking of buying it, I found it still a bit laboured on its humour. None of the delightful – Buddha running through a village wit. And it makes Arzee's relentless self-pitying stream of thoughts tedious to read after some time. In my opinion, humour is the most brilliant ink that a pen which speaks of human tragedy dips into. The reason I go back to reading 'English Augist' once every coupe of years is to relish the brilliant wit with which Upmanyu underlines Agastya's alienation and his inner throes. In fact, the wit in Arzee reminded me of a friend's, a comparison I will speak about later. The author needs to work there.
Coming to the lecture, after the browsing, I realised that the book was not for the casual reader – though the writing is very simple and straight-forward – since the freshness of breath from the urban angst and my college strongest my life coolest sophomoric stuff churning by the gazillions would be lost in most people who have not anguished between the yawning gap between the writings from other countries, even Pakistan, and our own. I imagined a small quiet high-brow huddle where I will furtively lurk in the shadows like an interloping mosquito looking for a silent suck of blood while no one was looking.
Imagine my surprise, when the door opened to an auditorium with around a hundred people sitting in plush sand-brown seats and the author confidently standing on the bare stage, bare but for a Perspex lectern with the British Council logo on the author’s right and a low table with a glass top and spindly legs on his left with a few standing copies of his book. I was directed to one of the two seats available somewhere in the middle. As I sat, I realised that there were a few seats available in the front two rows where I thought, rightly so as I later realised, I recognized a few faces from some of the cross-referential literati blog posts.
The talk was short – an hour at the most – and I soon realised, too basic for my taste. Instead of budding writers, or even mature readers, it was catered more towards budding readers. And in this, as the Q&As revealed, the author had gauged the standing of the majority of the audience well.
Chandrahas is a natural speaker, reminding me again of the friend whose unfortunate short-coming (I couldn’t resist the pun) of low wit he shares, but seems like an honest and nice guy. And no doubt, humble. (Here the author describes his reading skills as humble which, after listening to him talk impromptu and make much sense, I am sure, are not.)
He spoke mainly about rules of writing which to sum briefly were – read without a plan and outside your comfort zone, the power of knowing the etymology of the words you intend to use (I found his “my favourite book being Oxford Eng Dictt” a bit fatuous), keeping a notebook (Loved the phrase he used – catching a thought on its wing), making notes on the book you read (which I do, read Anne Fadiman’s excellent Ex Libris for an entire chapter on this), reading poetry (alas! My Achilles’ heel!) to understand why words need to be used sparsely and powerfully – though Arzee itself, I feel, is a bit too worded, think about form beside the content – not very well explained but I understood what he meant – the thought he’s put on form shows beautifully in Arzee, using the internet and being patient.
He spoke almost nothing about the book – the wings of whose expectation had flown me fotry kilometres from my Aravali perch after taking a half day leave. Where he labored the most, which word he spent a couple of months searching for, the pangs of self-doubt, the brilliant epiphanies on the darkest nights, the inspiration for some thoughts incidents and characters, the subtle interplay he’s trying to point towards – none of it.
And once the Q&A started, I realised that most of the audience, and by most I mean something over 95%, hadn’t read a word of Arzee.
The beginning question was ‘I read the line by Atal Bihari Vajpayee “You can choose your friend, not your neighbours.” How do I include them in some Hindi poetry I want to write?’ this was uttered in halting English by a young man, something that usually makes the British Council tuitions attending types either snickering or nodding in vigorous guilty awareness of their privileges, and was so attended.
With this question, I realised one another aspect of Chandrahas – his greatness, or perhaps his astounding ability to not let his befuddled frustration show. For me this question is like asking ‘Meri nani mar gayi hain, main kalkatta kaise jaun?’ in a forum to answer question on AIDS. Kudos to Chandrahas to actually form some reply to it with lots of laughs and warmth.
An unlikely trio sat in front of me, behind the girl with a smile to stop your heart, a tall thin man with hair of a shape I do not have the vocabulary to describe, another with a looooong pony tail and again bony features, and – here the unlikely part starts – a well built sardaarji, slightly towards the flabby, with a mountain of a turban. Throughout the lecture, they exchanged meaningful glances (no, not those meanings) and even titters – if that word could be used to describe the giggles of males like these. I was rather awed by their act and decided that they must be knowing something about the author that I didn’t. A passing mention of the young gentleman on my right who brought memories of attending lectures in audis like this when, for some reason, he would get flustered every time I took some notes, and then hurriedly copy them from my pad to his.
After this brilliant start, the sardaarji raised his arm. I caught my breath waiting for him to stand tall and reveal that he was Rushdie in guise. Instead, the sardaarji started with an introduction to his doctor self (Chandrahas had mentioned his admiration for people who can follow literary fiction besides working) – I was shocked when he mentioned that he had eight years of experience, same as mine more or less, when the man was clearly a decade older than me at least but thankfully he mentioned that he’d switched a few jobs before medical. After the brief biodata, the question came. The author had said that you should read deeply and stuff you can’t comprehend right away, while in competition exams you’re required to read comprehensions in minutes! Laughter.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have the wit! The sort you find in small-town parties tottering with a glass in hand and placing a hand over your shoulder and shouting in a stale whiskey-laden breath ‘Young Man!’
I would have rolled my eyes all the way back if the girl in front had not been turning her head behind to have a look at the sardaarji.
More questions were asked. All of them almost screaming that no one (save perhaps a couple) of the questioners had even attempted to understand where the author was coming from. Some of the questions were like asking Geet Sethi about carrom. These are the times you want to kick Delhi in the nuts. Its loudness, its obsessive hankering to talk talk talk and strut strut strut without caring to first nurture the substance within. I doubt if these standard of questions would have been asked in Bangalore or Chennai.
The sardaarji tried to butt once more in – without feeling the need, this time, for the author to pass him the turn to speak or the mike to be passed to him – but the author was able to cut him very skilfully.
The session over, we lined to buy the book. The author had mentioned that he’d sold only 20 books so far and I hope to heavens he was joking. Working on sales projections this month, you realise that even the tiniest niches of India’s emerging consumer class translates to a consumption of billions of dollars. And here you have this fine famous blogger and reviewer with a commendable book and he’s managed to sell twenty?!
I shuffled and ran into a discussion where an author suggested I join his fan club, and I politely refused. Behind me in the line stood a lady I recognised from a jacket blurb of short stories collection I had browsed through the day before. Mridula Koshy. A down-to-earth sweet lady. I had read only one story of hers, and not been able to concentrate enough – she doesn’t write easily – to form an opinion. Some other time maybe.
After some time we realised that the line was being cut abundantly and concentrated on moving ahead. And so I finally met Chandrahas who took the book I had just bought (at 20% discount! Touche, LandMark!) and hurriedly scrawled over it uttering some polite gurgles both of us didn’t give much weight to – especially after the couple of minutes he’s spent bending an ear to listen better to the girl ahead of me. (Yes, he’s not quite dwarfish.) Just as Chandrahas took my book to sign, the sardaarji made an appearance behind him and shouted that the author seriously consider his question -- to which Chandrahas laughed and promised to take it offline.
Once over, I hung around the back of the audi. A stage always makes me feel sad and remember my happy days on it; and I sat on a seat in the back drinking the stage, the curtains parted aside, the wings, the stereo, the lights, the carpeted aisles dropping to it – and left after some minutes.
I walked from there to CP, taking the outer circle where the shops are more crowded and bustling than the inner, drinking in the sights I always took for granted and am so denied in the sanitized cocooned urbania of Gurgaon, had some bhelpuri, followed some cops as they went about harassing street hawkers and push-cart vendors, even those with licenses, and sat under a tree for an hour, at the corner of the inner circle. I watched people board autos – I still vividly remember the African teenaged boys, the Keralite huddle in their mundus(?) haggling with a boy selling handkerchiefs, a very pretty girl cross the street with a bearded admittedly-handsome fella, and listening to a spindly young man on my right, who sat on his haunches on the cemented circle under the tree, and told someone on the phone that things will improve after September and not to think of marriage before that as his good time is staring after October.
I don’t know why I wrote so much today. It’s been a day without meaning – a day like the ones I used to spend a long time ago never knowing how much I will miss them. This is the first time I am speaking in words about these days. My last years in Lucknow and then Bangalore were spent in the shadows of such events (not in Lucknow tho’) and shunting around markets watching people – always absolutely alone. And silent. When I came back home, when home was not an empty apartment and I had people to ask me where I had been, I would give non-committal replies – and not that I knew the answers. These were my happiest days.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Why reading news every day might be getting in the way of your understanding things
My days are still meandering – I still spend half my working day chasing numbers which get irrelevant by the end of the day, the other half is spent in the smoking corridors talking about office politics and how big an asshole somebody is. Evenings are spent alone in the apartment with meanderings on the net, discursive readings and thinking, and lots of sleeping.
Part of the reason I have not blogged is that I’m not doing any readings on current affairs. My morning papers get dumped to the climbing pile of trash without a glance at even the back-page. To illustrate, I did not follow the entire follow-up to the elections and was totally unaware of the pre-poll alliances which different parties had engaged in. I am very ashamed of my lack of awareness of the relevant and have serious concerns in the efficacy of my future credibility in discussions if much of what is happening in my life is whizzing off my head without even my hearing their whiz.
I have no excuse, but let me come to some of the things that might be underlying my otherwise clueless state. For one, I have followed news quite intently for some years and the thing is – it never stops; and it seems to run around in circles. It might add credibility to my participation in stairwell discussions, but does it really make sense following pre-poll alliances when these alliances are alliances of pure convenience and not ideological, and hence subject to change with the context, as I have seen them change again and again.
It's difficult for me to give more than a couple of hours of reading every day and, in that space, blogs, wikipedia, news and books slog it out. In this space, I want to be abreast with what is happening and also form a more informed picture about the world I inhabit. Unfortunately, the endless pounding of news flashes, which might serve to keep me updated on the latest (and mostly the inconsequential), they obstruct many a times the second purpose.
I want ot understand the first principles of the ideologies underlying the social structure and consciousness, than their nth-order effects.
There was a time when I assiduously followed the morning paper but even after years of it I find myself half-informed on the range of topics I've followed. For all the years of diligently following the headlines, about a score of terror attacks – with reading of all the analyses, opinions and editorials – and a million stories of rape (which I now suspect are put more for their titillating and shock effect than any concern regarding violation of rights), I have neither any informed understanding of the mechanics of terror, why people are convinced enough to kill themselves to kill a few other, nor do I understand the human mind inured to cruelty. For all the years of following successive governments, I do not understand what democracy really means; for all the Left-bashing, I still do not understand dialectical materialism.
As part of preparation for CAT, I read a lot of editorials. The good thing about editorials and guest columns is that they offer not only a set of facts but also a point of view associated with them and hence, like pre-masticated food, are easier and faster to incorporate into the arsenal of world-views which makes an “informed” man.
But now I am beginning to understand that the analysts come from the same world that I do, a world where a million things are happening every second, and only a dozen have to vie for your attention in tomorrow’s newspaper’s headlines. Hence, if there is a terror attack in some city tonight, the analyst has to discuss that tomorrow and, if the next day, a nobel laureate dies, the analyst has to discuss the day after. It’s like a giant aeroplane with a dozen snags happening at random every day and hogging the headlines, and in the process, your mind, the day after. Next day, different set of snags, different occupation of the mind. You never get to sit back and understand the underlying mechanics of the plane which will predict these snags by themselves. Your mind is never free enough to think and understand the unity of themes which underline many of the effects we are reacting towards. We do not get the time to study history, how the same themes have been always present there, how they have evolved, and how some of the best minds have judged them then.
Worse, even the analyst’s mind is not free anymore and pushed into the reactive mode. So much of the analysis is dependent on the results of what happened!
The way truth is tested in statistics is that you make a hypothesis, you test it and then based on the significance of the expected results (how often they happen in a given random sample), you accept or reject it. Of course, the same rigor cannot be expected in human affairs. I cannot imprison a hundred people and subject them to conditions to test my hypotheses; but I do expect a formulation of a thesis independent of events before it is tested in the proof of the events. Instead, I see the reverse happen many a times – an event happens, then an extenuation is hesitatingly forwarded, that extenuation becomes an explanation, that explanation becomes a fact. The bigger analysts proceed straight from events to facts nowadays. Tharoor’s article on why engineers become terrorists is a good example to illustrate how sometimes even the better minds are driven to utter drivel by the pressures of 2-minutes analysis.
Tharoor says that engineers produce more terrorists because they’re not trained in social sciences. His first hypothesis that engineers make more terrorists (instead of the better brains of the generation, as somewhat captured in academic tests, drifting towards the ideology of extreme, and who happen to come more from the engineering stream because, let’s accept it, most of the people who get into social sciences are those who couldn’t get into engineering) is itself dubious. It smacks of this logic – two terrorists killed were wearing imitation Levis Tshirt; hence, people wearing imitation Levis are more inclined to be terrorists. A deeper thinking would recognize that more than what was printed on the Tshirt, it is the imitation which is important, belying the economic strata the terrorists came from. Let us not get into the reason how Tharoor explains this proclivity, because I like the guy, and if his mundu fell off somewhere, let us not step on it and prolong his butt-naked misery.
To come to more recent news, going into the IPL final, where the two leading captains were – Kumble, a spinner, and Gilly, an Australian – and the previous IPL was won by an Australian spinner, I shuddered at reading analyses that day which would underline how IPLs were won by teams led by captains who were, based on the result of the final, a spinner or an Australian; as indeed it happened.
A similar newsbyte concerns the Indian debacle at world Cup. IPL is being cited as the reason for the failure – so easy for a coach to deflect responsibility. But wasn’t this very IPL held the reason for the success in the previous World Cup? Frankly speaking, I believe a sporting contest is very simply judged – it’s a test of will and skill – and the rooting spectators are aware of that. Injured athletes winning championships have been the fodder of a thousand myths. Analysts need to keep analysing the finer points for the same reasons why TV channels need to retelecast old matches endlessly – to appease the demand. Without meaning to sound deliberately disparaging, I feel that most of these columns (analysts like Prem Panicker excluded) fulfil the same function that pornography does – it satisfies a compulsion and there is nothing ennobling (insightful) in it.
But I do not intend to focus on cricket analysis. I indulge in it too – in the same way as I watch pornography and I engage in the same discussions everyday on the stairwells touting the same arguments ad nauseum.
My point is that even where analysis is on topics which we seek to understand and not part of our daily fodder of compulsions: news like random terror attacks or something like Nithari, the analysis are in themselves flawed.
The thesis underlying its arguments derives from the results and hence in the absence of a suitable antithesis already foregone in its conclusion.
Hence, the first argument against daily news analysis is that the method of production of that analysis is too compromised for it to be taken seriously in many cases.
The exceptions are actually that: exceptions; I read Indian Express and except for Pratap Bhanu and Shiv Vishwanathan, I've not seen much mind-stirring insights in most other analysts.
Sudheeran, the BJP thinker, in fact underlines the monomanic vacuity to which such prestigious columns have fallen to.
Not surprisingly, Shiv Vishwanathan writes 4 articles a year, while Sudheeran writes 4 articles a month.
The next argument is that why, in a million events a second world, do only a score be considered news-worthy?
This, I would believe, is something everyone would have thought of by now – especially after the Chand-Fiza saga refuses to end even now. I’m reasonably sure that you would have, at some point of time, thought, “Who fucking cares?”; and that you would have suspected that what is news is news only because it titillates. Entertainment over substance.
Hence, I would assume that you agree that most of what is news is news because it helps the paper sell better, rather than being the most meaningful statements of our times.
A few words on how some of the great thinkers thought true knowledge works.
Socratetic dialectics aims to arrive at the first principle by the process of dialogue. A thesis is put forward – black people are inferior to white people. An antithesis is found and quoted – Jesse Owens beat white pure-bred Aryans in a fair contest. A synthesis happens – most black people are inferior to white people.
Note, that “all” is now “most”. If a mind thinks long enough, a synthesis might be ultimately reached which says – “Race has got nothing to do with it.” That is, race is not a fundamental principle of judging capability.
News analysis – anchored as it’s on the shifting, transitory character of “news” – mostly never lets the thesis meet an antithesis.
This thesis today, that tomorrow.
Engineers terrorists today, all Telugu businessmen corrupt tomorrow.
In seeking to keep us always engaged by following issues as and when and where they keep popping up, it gets in the way of our thinking through an issue.
Hence, even after these years of reading, I still feel totally unable to understand why the world is the way it is.
I am trying to correct that now.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Speaking to self
Absurdity is, as Camus explains, the gap between our innate desire for unity of answers and meaning in this world, what we see and the gap. All three are essential ingredients – there can be no feeling of absurdity without our expectation, the reality and the gap.
Another way to define absurdity is it is an objective assessment of the way things are – haphazard and meaningless, and the way we live – force of habit and rituals, elusive hopes notwithstanding. A world where values and meaning do not mean anything actually: if this is true, then so is the contrary.
I do not think there is meaning to existence, and am comfortable with it most of the times. My life is not an act of hope, an act of elusion as Camus says – I do not believe in meaning bigger than life: religion for example.
Yet, and this is where the dichotomies start: I am committed to the idea of liberalism. That everyone has the right to be whatever they are and want to be, wherever they are, with equal rights in all things, as long as their conduct is within the precepts of decency (and not morality).
Equally, I am attached to the idea of honesty – though I do not profess I am an honest person most of the times (our instincts and habits precede our idea and thoughts – again from Camus).
So, I have a value system.
A value system is different from a desire – a desire is simply what I want while a value is what I expect of others too. I expect the world to be honest – that is a value. But if I desire an apple (let’s keep this post clean), I do not expect everyone in the world to desire it too.
Is this irrational?
Having values means I imply meanings greater to what I see and know.
Monday, August 18, 2008
Thoughts
I hate the 'idealists': I have a few people in mind. Idealism, without due respect to the context, is foolishness of the owrst kind; it is the foolishness that gets your friends killed.
Not all life is precious. Not everything needs to be preserved. Not everyone needs to be appeased. People who can't make the distinction have deep guilt complexes and are exactly the sort who let Hitler get away with so much for so long.
People are not born stupid; they choose to be one.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Alone
And I am again all alone.
A movie ends,
A book tires,
A conversation ends:
And I am left to fend for the emptiness
That rushes in.
A city sleeps beneath me
Dark, sinewy and beautiful.
A car plows in the distance
Slow, purposeful and alone;
I try to reach beyond the metal
But can’t.
A city sleeps beneath me
And I hover above it
Silent, smoking, conscious and
Alone.
Monday, June 30, 2008
A Gita quote remembered
When I had just entered the IIT, I had a sneaking guilt that I was still not a deserving candidate.
Now, after twelve years of rubbing shoulders with smart kids from Bangalore , Delhi and the Stateswhose fathers knew how the world worked,it seems kind of silly. But somewhere I can still remember that gnawing ache of lifting the small box that was my world then and seeing the vast one beyond - and the only lever there was was academics. For all of us.
I still remember the homesick moments I shared with Goel just after landing in the campus; where he even contemplated leaving the college for LU. Yes, the Excel Goel.
But this is not a mawkish post regarding my somewhat humble beginnings - but about a quote that stayed with me from those years.
I did very well in the first semester but in the second semester, I really screwed my mid-sems. It's difficult to communicate the horror and the shame that one can feel at that time: I actually can't "feel" it; just remember it. Some of my very good friends never came out of that loss of ego from the five point tag; but that's a different story. I needed support; I needed guidance. But it was not "cool" to worry about acads, and, anyway, it was a personal battle.
I pasted the oft-quoted Gita line: "tum bas apna karma karo, phal ki chinta main karunga." on my door.
It gave me courage and is one of the three-four quotes that I have held very close to my life.
The thing was: my interpretation was that persevere and things will follow.
I succeeded.
By the second year, I was not even studying and results were following.
Thing happenned: I found myself at places where I didn't want to be. I didn't know where I wanted to be, just that whatever it was, it wasn't here.
Struggle, more emotional than physical, followed. Reinventions.
Over the years, I learnt somethings about myself - a faculty I was not gifted with but had to acquire.
Now, the quote still lingers but I think the "phal", the fruit of the action, that Krishna eludes to is more in the tone of a father telling the son to just run the race.
The action itself is the fruit.
Because the action comes from what you are - it is your sense of self projected.
Fruits, as many make them out to be - success, money, fame - are too trivial in this quest for the self. I have had more than my fair share of successes, but would have rather have some actions that I passed over.
That's my interpretation right now.
Perhaps it would change. Perhaps there is a "fruit" that I still can't see hanging. Perhaps, nirvana is not as simplistic and escapist as the construct I rejected as a kid. Maybe there's something beyond.
The beauty of ageing is knowing: there are truths that can't be forced otherwise (by truth I mean self-perceptions: I am too unwise to get into arguments regarding what truth actually is). You might read a million books, discuss impossible theories with brilliant professors; but they come to you when their time has come:like a whisper in the ear as you sleep. Like a wisdom tooth or a whitening root or the hint of a wrinkle.
And some quotes, poems, stories, art - acquire another meaning then.
I think that's where great art.
I wish I was more refined and deeper in my thinking to probe beyond this rather inarticulate thought.
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Books inedibly
This is going to be a bit corny but I am trying to follow a train of thought.
At the popular level, a book can be compared to a dish; anywhere between gourmet and badly burnt.
That brings us to what makes a good dish.
Effort, perseverance, balance, and the range of ingredients, spices and experience at the disposal of the chef.
I think a simile of how that ties with writing a book would be redundant: the parallel is pretty evident.
I will just stick to popular fiction here.
Harry Potter would be a rehash of an old favourite recipe people had forgotten.
Chetan Bhagat would be the 2-minute noodles that impatient kids would gulp down and just do away with the temporary stomach ache. Taste is not the issue here, just hunger.
Brick Lane would be a bland rice and daal (bhaat in this context) with very little of the salt.
Most of the chick lits are the heavily spiced chat that girls love to have –like Shobha De’s columns – all spice, no content.
English August is a seven course meal that grows on you with each serving.
Mitch Albom is the chicken flavoured soup – smells like a regular chicken soup, tastes like it too, but not the real stuff.
Above average is a cake well done mostly but, sadly, burnt at the edges. And no icing.
Angela’s Ashes series are the recipes that a master chef held within himself for years and years till he finally decided to step inside the kitchen and delight the world.
That bring us to Ishiguro. Always a chef who tried to make something joyfully heavenly in its simplicity by poring his heart and sweat out in it; and yet. Just a hint but something missing. But one day, he cooked Remains of the Day and was elevated to one of the grandest master-chefs of today.
McEwen, Rushdie, Marcquez are too grand to be called mere chefs – they are wizards.
Tuesday, June 17, 2008
Ants in the pants with regard only scants
1. Someone told me today she likes men with personality. What the hell does that mean?
Everybody has personality. Even a mousy looking, bespectacled and stuttering accountant (the example is according to the "standard" the girl was probably talking about). It might be wussy to you, but it's a personality all right - a wussy personality.
2. i hate the expression - "Believe you me". of course, it's the "you"the speaker is requesting the credibility of. that's how conversations work -- when you're speaking to someone, you're speaking to him. every time somebody says this, i want to scream - of course, it's going to be me! do you see anyone else around? just a way of stretching a short sentence by a syllable.
3. Over a discussion nmy beloved ChetanBhagat, somebody passed a judgement that language should always contain the most basic synonym. Just coz the generation today is too illiterate to know otherwise, out of the rich possibilities of synonyms, each with its own nuance, I am to call a simper a smile, an ebullience a shine, an so forth.
4. In another discussion, somebody advised me to never qualify verbs and adjectives with more adjectives and adverbs. and i was thinking, in a single sweep, this person has disqualified everything that i love McEwen and Banville for.
5. I am trying to squeeze in my first chetan bhagat between a Ben Okri and Rushdie. Enough said.
If you're one of those wasted Gen Mediocre, have a triple scoop sundae - chocolate, turd and butterscotch: and you'll know how it's like for me.
Thursday, May 29, 2008
On silence
- A silence shared is worth a thousand conversations.
- Life teaches you silence.
- A moment, a life, an eternity - a silence.
- Noise - cacopohonous Bollywood numbers, strident K serials scores, screaming headlines, howling critics, stacatto of ad spots, the mumble, the grumble. All fighting for your mind, you soul in the sheepskin of 'contemporarily relevant'.
- The opposite of silence is not sound. It is a man talking to himself, justifying to himself why the fact that he's a dumb lazy fuck is the world's responsibility.
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Thinking aloud
People hurt that the world does not meet thier ideals?
Do people really change?
Are you any different from the kid years ago? You might have wisened up, have heaps of scartissues to show, become bitter - but is your first reaction any different?
Are the people with the answers the most clueless?
Wednesday, June 20, 2007
Moving to Delhi
Suddenly, you're without a roof over you.
the apple and peach you painted for the kitchen door has to be pealed down now for it never was your kitchen door.
The posters torn, the old, weather-beaten shoes which hugged you in this and that trek to be left over for the cook or the maid.
The small nothings, the books - suddenly homeless and in indifferent and cold cartons.
In life we try to define ourselves by the things we buy. Not the essential utilities; but the skull shaped pen-stand or the cute little pendant key-chain. Sifting through them and touching them over - LucknowKanpurBombayChicagoBangaloreTokyoDelhi - it's as if a different era altogether now.
Tuesday, June 19, 2007
Isn't it funny...
2. The louder the voice, the less the substance.
3. People harping on "East or west, India is the best" have seen neither much of the FarEast nor the West.
4. We crave simplicity, but are in a juggernaut of more and more complexity.
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
Tugs
Part of me tells me to hold on to that purity and faith. And then I become the introverted, self-doubting pariah.
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Compensation for what?
A few months ago, I heard about the Shramjivi blasts in a similar fashion.
Have we really become so insensitive to tragedy?
Is political damage control more expedient than the ground-zero one?
Contrast this with the aftermath - immediate and medium-term - in terrorist attacks in the US and UK.
The issue of compensation arises in two situations -
1.Terrorist strikes - As these are targeted towards every citizen of India, we have to bear the joint ownership of the damage. Hence, any compensation in this regard is meaningless; the only answer is action against the perpetrators.
2.Accidents/mishaps - Instead of letting the possible culprits fix the cost of life immediately and absolve themselves at the cost of taxpayers' money, the concerned departments/ministers should be brought to court. Compensation, and punitive measures, should be fixed likewise.
Let's stop this nonsense immediately.
Friday, May 11, 2007
The answers within
http://salvagepoint.blogspot.com/2007_04_01_archive.html
Her point is "...no matter how far we go or how successful we get, there are so many aspects that remain unfulfilled, so many bones of contention, so many unhappy moments and so many desires that die without being realised."
In my comment, I have proposed Pareekh's Venn Diagram theory of life. To repeat, in this venn box there are lots of circles denoting personal space, relationships, career, art, etc. You can expand these circles to occupy the max space (as good time managers do) but ultimately if you want to expand a circle, you have to reduce some other. This is what balance is - how big a circle you want all these different aspects to be.
Ultimately, every decision is a sacrifice. It's up to you what you want to sacrifice.
Happiness is not defined by a hierarchy in the peer-pressure network, but comes from a sense of fulfillment and accomplishment from within. The strong know it, the weak take a lifetime to discover thiss.
Monday, December 04, 2006
What lies beneath
Since childhood, my fascination has been two fold - stories and the people in those stories. I like seeing people. The way they move, scratch and mutter. I discovered this when a friend from school met me last month and told me this. In IIMB, I had a guy named Anurag Hans sitting next to me and he followed the same interest. We had a whale of a time discussing why everybody wore the clothes they had worn to the class then, which of the guy might turn out to be a wife-beater, dear old Vibhor Kumar and other odd topics.
Now that I have started clicking a few, I find that it's again people that interest me. Caught unawares. I hate getting fotografed and fotografing people striking a pose. A digitalSLR gives me the freedom of keep on clicking till the person drops the pose and gets oblivious to my antics and gives me something more soulful.
Here is a collage of people who have interested me in the past 2 months and whom I have clicked.
Top - San, Nilanjan, San, Srijit, Prachi, Me (clicked accidentally)Middle - Prachi, Prachi, Ronjon Da, the very handsome and very young Raheem, my favorite subject - Rajeev
Bottom - San, Vibhas, Gulshan, Tara, Vibhas, Tammy
Sunday, December 03, 2006
The need to be seen
I've met some celebrities also. And tho' I don't live in the shadow of those events, I still wonder - that did they affect me even for a little while thereafter? Did I feel elated by an aura of celebrityhood (the phenomenon of strangers pointing and gaping at you from across the street instead of just ignoring you) experienced second-hand? Did I make more of a casual meeting with a comedian who rarely makes me laugh, a thspian who does, a singer who brays just because the no. of people knowing the guy-girl outratioed those konwing me by a factor of 10000:1?
Another seemingly related point. Since I have started clicking strangers, I find the ratio of people interested in getting fotografed to those indifferent to be huge. Sometimes with an enthusiasm which is difficult to explain since it's very clear that they're never even going to see the foto.
Why do we all have this craving, this need to be noticed?