Of snapshots and memories

Photographs are curious things. They can have the most unusual effect on you. I was rummaging through my old album when I chanced upon one that reminded me of a particularly endearing time. We were together even then, my cousin and I. Even though the photo was jaded I could still make out the place. It was my grandmother’s. It was over 30 years old and had an orchard that smelled like mangoes or jackfruits depending on the time of the year. We were barely two years old. I was perched on a tricycle of sorts. My cousin, Nannu as I call him was sheepishly trying to climb on it with me. We were both fairly plump and posed in the manner expected of two year olds- clumsy but cute nevertheless. I had a big head back then, large pronounced forehead and loose flowing hair, almost girl like. My big brown eyes stared in to the camera, perplexed, like a deer in front of headlights.I was wearing a blazing red tee and purple shorts. Nannu had softer features, a farcry from what he looks like now. He was wearing blue tees and green shorts. He had jet black hair combed to perfection, a funny shaped nose, sea green eyes and, in the picture, his face wore a calm and unassuming smile.The picture itself looked like it was taken around late evening when the sun’s much kinder and it gave our skins an orange hue. It must have been windy for my hair was awkwardly out of place. We looked so happy and content that it was almost ethereal. There was just so much of joy in that picture that it reminded me of a much simpler time, a time where innocence prevailed, a time when purple and green shorts were in vogue, a time that I realised, I’d do well to remember.

The crime of Nathuram Godse

                                                               
There’s a piece of little known history about the man who killed Gandhi. Nathuram Godse’s speech during his trial remains largely unknown. Surprisingly enough his testimony at the trial  sort of blurs the line between right and wrong. Our government has a notorious reputation for banning any sort of literature that even remotely questions the established dictum and they made sure that the 2 books Godse wrote during his time in  prison never saw the light of day. If anything the fact that they don’t want people reading what he has to say probably lends it more credibility. Nathuram Godse shot Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi 3 times on the 30th of january 1948 and surrendered without much resistance. To think that it was a crime of passion motivated by  religion and the like would be a grave mistake since he actively worked against the caste system and untouchability and was in every sense a free thinking man. He gave a lengthy discourse at the trial discussing the moral and philosophical incentives that led him to the act.

I’ve paraphrased the whole thing:-

‘Gandhi’s religious inclinations were inconsistent and hypocritical. Apparently he read the Koran in a temple but wouldn’t dare to read the Gita in a mosque  At the time of the partition hindu’s were being massacred in west Bengal and Gandhi went on a fast demanding that India honour the agreement of paying a certain sum of money to Pakistan. This blatant support for Pakistan at a time when the hindu community at large was in shell shock was insensitive and inconsiderate. This he felt added fuel to fire and added to the growing animosity between the two communities. 

Another point he makes is that Gandhi was a major egotist. To believe in ahimsa and his principles also meant that you considered him to be infallible. He contends that since his policies obviously did not convince Jinnah against the partition he should have let someone else deal with him. But as it panned out he couldn’t bring himself to let go of his lofty principles for the sake of the country.Godse believed that with Gandhi gone the Indian political system would be more practical and powerful and not be constrained by ahimsa. India would finally have its own army which would not have been a likely prospect had Gandhi been around.’

When you think about it I think Gandhi might have gotten lucky with his approach. It sure had novelty going for it but, above all it required the compliance of the enemy for it to succeed. If it was a flawless approach Anna Hazare’s movement would have been a grand success. All the movement managed to stir up were a few weak policy changes. Now that’s the story of a movement that had virtually everything going for it, widespread media coverage, mass support and immense political pressure for change. The story of Irom Sharmila  on the other hand barely made an impact. She has been fasting for well over a decade protesting against the stationing of army men in Manipur who allegedly raped the local women. Both these events reiterates the fact that ahimsa with/without media coverage needs the opposing party to repent and come to terms with the fact that they are the ones that need to change. Call me cynical but I think that’s a mad man’s fantasy. There’s a reason why greedy people keep wanting more, why criminals tend to remain criminals, why slackers don’t turn achievers overnight. It’s because we are hard wired to be that way. People don’t change that easily, at least not in ways that matter.

If you can think about the whole thing from a completely rational point of view Godse had a point, Gandhi would have been a major roadblock if India had any plans of getting itself an army and lets face it, even the most staunch Gandhian would have a hard time convincing people otherwise in the wake of an increasingly hostile world. I can think of no occasion where violence has been used more judiciously and effectively than when Israel retaliated in kind to Black September. Israeli athletes were kidnapped during the  Munich Olympics and murdered by terrorists. The Israeli prime minister formed a special team to track down and take down those responsible. The mission went off like clockwork and to think that they accomplished this in an age where the fastest means of communication was a telegram makes it even more impressive. No one dared mess with Israel in the aftermath of the events that had transpired. Ahimsa (in my opinion) is therefore impractical and arguably ineffective in the modern world.

Godse's original statement also argues that Gandhi was a major egotist. Can you blame him (Gandhi)? I mean its hard not to get delusions of grandeur when you have the kind of support that was hitherto unseen and unheard of. I know I’ve been working with the assumption that everything Godse said makes sense but  he makes a compelling case by very clinically dismantling Gandhi’s aura of infallibility. Also Gandhi was not a true practitioner of ahimsa. He once ordered to kill a cow that was in pain because the noise it made annoyed him (I’m not kidding, his own autobiography corroborates this story). Every human being is inherently flawed and putting Gandhi on a pedestal without due consideration isn’t logical. Everyone’s done something hypocritical in their life and since Gandhi’s life has been under the scanner more than most others it's natural that some one is going to interpret the hell out of the inconsistencies. But then again people tend to have something called confirmation bias. It’s when  they have trouble letting go of their perceived persona of someone. They want good people to remain good and heroes to remain heroes even when there’s stacks of evidence pointing to the contrary. It’s what happened in Lance Armstrong’s case. People only started conceiving the idea of him having doped after he finally admitted to it. It's not about the bike well, apparently it wasn't about the man either.

There is another story surrounding Jinnah's death that if proven to be more than just conspiracy theory would really be bad for Gandhi's legacy. Jinnah was the one man that badly wanted the formation of a muslim state which was a farcry from the stand he took during the 1920's as a devout congressman. Back then he advocated Hindu-Muslim unity but was disillusioned by Gandhi's ways around the 1940's and began demanding that India be partitioned. Jinnah was a heavy smoker and was diagnosed with lung cancer. He died on 11th September 1948 barely a year after the partition. Some claim that Gandhi was aware of Jinnah's medical condition before hand . They argue that Gandhi should've taken advantage of this information and stalled the partition. Without Jinnah the whole notion of a divided nation would've died down. If that's the case then one can't help but question Gandhi's motives. Why would he hold such critical information and not use it for the good of the country? If there's even a little bit of truth to this story then Godse would truly stand vindicated.

I won’t go so far as to say that it was right that Godse killed Gandhi  because that would be mightily unfair and ungrateful but I think I can safely say that he gave Gandhi martyrdom, sort of immortalized him. In a way he made sure that Gandhi didn’t have to live long enough to see himself become the villain.

  

All said, Gandhi did win us freedom. He may have had many flaws but the one thing he had was immeasurable courage. His  methods did bear fruit if only to be made a mockery of in the hands of lesser men. Godse had his reasons and the courage to act on his beliefs and in that both men were equal. Both were selfless and prepared to give themselves to see their dreams realised. The irony is that both men died for the same cause but are remembered in starkly different ways.

A-V-I-A-L

Its an odd name for a band and is certainly not the only odd thing about them as a fan would tell you.Despite their long list of musical inadequacies they are quite a phenomenon among young malayalies as was obvious by the overwhelming turnout for one of their recent concerts in Kochi.For the longest time good music in the state was confined to the genius of Dr.K.J.Yesudas  and a few others but it didn’t really produce music that connected with a broader audience. Mallu music had reached an impasse in terms of creative work when avial arrived on the scene around a decade ago. 


Non-existent lyrical brilliance is what hits you first when you listen to their songs but over time you learn to see past that and sometimes(like in my case) even enjoy it.But they are by no means a prolific band,infact it took them 4years after they announced their self titled album for it to finally see the light of day.But they made it well worth the wait with what I thought was a brilliant first album. Avial has 4 permanent members as of now.Rex Vijayan on the guitar gives the songs a tone that makes them distinctly avial .He used to be with motherjane before shifting his loyalties.Tony John is the band’s vocalist.Naresh kamath,the bass guitarist is the only non-malayali in the band and Mithun Puthanveetil on the drums is the son of a popular politician in kerala.


A very politically aware band, their songs discuss important social issues ranging from deforestation(aadu pambe) and aanakallan is a satirical take on the issue of fraud swami’s  and one of their songs features  brief recordings of Achuthanandan’s and Karunakaran’s(both ex chief minister’s of the state) campaigns. They have some of the best instrumental play I’ve heard in any band and even zar’roc who’s by far the biggest music geek I’ve met agrees with me on that front which is pretty weird because we have so very different tastes when it comes to music that everytime he hands me the earphones to listen to some song that he thinks is good I brace myself for an acoustic barrage. Plus another good thing about them is that they try to sound original  and no two songs are alike.


All of their music combines indie rock and folk to form what the band members like to call ‘alternative malayali rock’.Everybody has songs that they’d skip from their playlist when it comes up but I doubt if I’ll ever skip one of theirs.Motherjane is touted by many as the best mallu band yet and is said to be the shining example of the convergence of native music and the west but I feel that avial makes a stronger claim for the spot of the best mallu band especially since their songs are actually in Malayalam as opposed to Motherjane’s (heavily accented)English ones.They dared to defy convention and succeeded in a field plagued by pretty egregious work and if the previews of their new albums are anything to go by Motherjane’s locating new nadir’s with each of their songs while Avial only seems to get better.


Sure,their songs depict the decadent state of a society thats increasingly becoming inseperable from the west but,I think bands like avial keeps us rooted all the same,serves as a silent reminder of who we really are and where we come from.I have very few friends who enjoy their kind of music except maybe frodo(they sort of bring out the guitar fanatics in us). If you’re one of those people who are not exactly amused by  avial then I’d urge you to keep listening to them because they have a tendancy to grow on you and also because no other band can so wondrously turn a ? in to a !.

To be or not to be

Whether or not one believes in god is one of the most important moral questions we come across in life.One way or the other though,it always  tends to end up in an inordinately biased judgement.It has a lot to do with the way one has been brought up.Its in human nature to unquestioningly trust elders on their judgement.From an evolutionary perspective<winks at zar’roc>this helps our survival.But like any other system it is not without its flaws.Sometimes this mechanism misfires and in the case of religion,so much so that one does not see the blatant fact that it isn’t different from any other superstition.The only thing that gives religion the illusion of credibility is the fact that its an epidemic of sorts.

Being an atheist or at least sceptical almost always indicates an active and healthy mind.

That some of the most brilliant minds of our generation are atheists is testimony to this fact.

Oscar Wilde put it brilliantly when he said ‘If god existed religion would seem much more of an insult to him than atheism’. Consider the scams that happen in our country in the name of religion.Whether or not god exists may be open to debate but the notion of god manifesting himself in human form is ludicrous and outrageous at the very least.Sathya Sai Baba(said to have performed several “miracles”) declared himself the re-incarnation of Sai Baba of shirdi (who was a famous saint who died a few years prior to baba’s birth) around 1940.People/followers were so naïve that they didn’t see through what was very obvious sleight of hand.And it seems his death(curiously off the date he had predicted) was god showing off his sleight of hand.The amount of publicity and following such a person (arguably a giant fraud) gets in our country is appalling.In a country like India this event seems to draw parallels with the apotheosis of Tendulkar in which case the man did not ask for the adulation he receives moreover, it is warranted.

Sometimes people in an effort to validate the existence of god argue that there are many questions science still can’t answer.But such a question raises another-how is god any better?How is the concept of god by any stretch of imagination, a better alternative?.Creation was the great deed that god had supposedly performed.Darwin gave us something else entirely.Science has always been asked to back up its claims but when it comes to god,it smugly asks us to get rid of our rational mind, abandon all reason and embrace blind faith.Science hasn’t shown us that god doesn’t exist but,it has shown us that he does not have to exist.

Right from the beginning the human mind has been plagued by a baseless entity-an entity that is omnipotent and omniscient at the same time.For some people it is a figure to be feared,feared because he’s always watching,keeping count.I mean,some creep this god is!

Considering the things people do/don’t do in fear of god wouldn’t life be easier without him to worry about,to just let go?If you are confused as to where you stand and if god turns out to be more than just a figment of people's imagination, wouldn’t he respect you more for showing some spine and firmly believing in his non-existence than some nut job pretending to be a staunch believer for fear of retribution?The world might not be ready for a massive spiritual and religious revolution just yet though.Most people are so hopelessly dependant on religion that they will fight to protect it.

Like Douglas Adams said-‘Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it too?’Enough said.

(The following link is not intended to hurt anyone’s sentiments,its just amusing is all.)

 http://www.paucisverbis.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/religions-of-the-world.jpg

Proust Questionnaire

Any way i was reading this interview of Kamal Hassan in the papers and i noticed that the heading said ‘Proust questionnaire’.A quick search on wiki revealed that Marcel Proust was a French writer who answered a series of questions that are intended to reveal your character and is used commonly as a form of interview. I looked it up and though some of the questions seemed absurd and bordered on the trivial it seemed worthwile to answer them myself.If you plan to take the questionnaire yourself I should warn you to not take a look at Proust's own elegant answers first as they tend to influence your own.I'll get to it then...

What do you regard as the lowest depth of misery?

To not be able to live in the present,to worry too much about what you've done and what you must do.

Where would you like to live?

Wherever feels like home.Is that still a cliche?

What is your idea of earthly happiness?

Being around people who enjoy the same things you do, who are very similar to you but at the same time people from whom you stand to learn so much more.

To what faults do you feel most indulgent?

Amusing ones.

Who are your favorite heroes of fiction?

Howard Roark for being the man i can possibly never be,for knowing exactly what he wants and standing by his ideals no matter what.

Who are your favorite characters in history?

Ashoka-for symbolizing everything my country should be about

Gandhi-for being an astute politician

Lincoln-for being the charismatic leader that he was,for being way ahead of his time in thought and action.

Who are your favorite heroines in real life?

All single mothers.

Who are your favorite heroines of fiction?

Not many names come to mind but Scout from 'To kill a mockingbird' was particularly endearing.

Your favorite painter?

Ravi varma

Your favorite musician?

It changes constantly but Hans Zimmer and Zeppelin are my all time favourites.

The quality you most admire in a man?

Loyalty, courage, zeal.

The quality you most admire in a woman?

Tenderness,someone with a sense of calm and soft beauty.Well read and intellectually stimulating would be a bonus.

Your favorite virtue?

Intelligence.

Your favorite occupation?

Watching a really good movie on a holiday with no one to bother me.

Who would you have liked to be?

No one but myself of course because lets face it,i'm awesome.

What do you most value in your friends?

Frankness,loyalty,their tolerance for silence when they’re with me.

What is your principle defect?

Procrastination

What is your favorite color?

Black

What is your favorite flower?

Jasmine

What is your favorite bird?

The Eagle.

Who are your favorite prose writers?

Ayn rand, J.K.Rowling,Harper Lee.

Who are your favorite poets?

I haven't read enought to make an informed decision but i always thought keats was pretty good.

What are your favorite names?

Logan,Albus

What is it you most dislike?

Arrogance,Pretentiousness,the false sense of superiority I see in some people.

What historical figures do you most despise?

General Dyer

What event in military history do you most admire?

India-Pak war of 1971.

What natural gift would you most like to possess?

To think of good retorts during an argument and not after i've lost it miserably.

How would you like to die?

Happy and content might be too much to ask for so,quickly would be fine.

What is your present state of mind?

Lazy and disorganized.

What is your motto?

Failure is acceptable but not regrets.

Avant garde art

When the oscar nominees were announced recently my eyes immediately and quite by reflex devoured the entire list and  stopped at the best director's list for a closer scrutiny.

Something seemed wrong.it was not a list any person in his right mind would make at all.

A best directors list with no place for nolan is like cricket in India without Tendulkar or ‘House’

without Hugh Laurie (or something like that).

Frodo seemed to think it was a good idea to write about it anyway,So i sat down in front of the pc,leaned back and set my music player to play the incredible soundtrack of inception on loop,(you know, just to set the mood).

Talking about inception-well, when i left the theater after watching the film,i knew i had seen something unreal,something truly pathbreaking.I’ve watched a lot of movies  and i can tell you,i haven't felt that way after a film my whole life.We have been making motion pictures now for like atleast a 100 years and it felt like all those years of film making,all the great films of its times right through Hitchcock, Fellini, Bergman,Coppola, Kubrick, Spielberg,The Wachowski brothers, all those years of triumphant filmmaking had culminated in one scintillating spectacle-Inception.

From the incredible mind of Christopher Nolan,the man who makes it a point to introduce novelty in every one of his movies ,the man who has reminded us to bring our brains along when watching a movie,for him this movie was no different yet somehow this one stands out from the rest.

Yet the panel chose to honour David Fincher for a film that has its claims to merit but is not even close to being in the same league as Inception.From Fincher’s point of view this is a recognition long overdue since he was denied the award twice for Se7en and Fightclub with the latter going on to garner cult status after its release and fetching Chuck Palahniuk from whose book the movie was adapted immediate world wide acclaim.

The fighter (which is a mediocre film at best) is a surprise entry too.The film is just another boxing movie and not a watchable one at that either with Christian Bale looking like an exhumed corpse in what is widely considered the highpoint of his career.And lets face it ,True Grit (the other movie chosen ahead of Inception) isn’t a movie for the ages and I can tell you that by just looking at the basic plotline..

Its almost as if Nolan was deliberately overlooked,Perhaps the oscar panel has a fetish for insulting great films and genuinely awesome movie makers. Maybe they just take themselves a little too seriously,maybe they see some sort of pretentious greatness in choosing crappy films over brilliant ones.Nolan has truly outdone himself in this insanely brilliant modern-day classic..To quote imdb

“In a decade ‘incepion’ may be a religion” and I couldn’t agree more.

For the record

When i finally decided to take the plunge and start a blog i was apprehensive as to how it would turn out.My primary concern was the kind of material i would put up on my blog.I sure as hell did not want to bore people with platitudes and everyday banalities.As an attempt at keeping that promise i'm going to get the cliches over with in my first post itself.First thing you should know about me is that  i am an avid reader and that i watch movies like a maniac (yes i do spend a lot of time on imdb looking for movies i haven’t seen)and fitness is a new found inspiration.

I can listen to someone for aeons before they realize i'm not paying attention and honestly quite a few people elicit the same reaction from me.I am bored and annoyed by the stuff that most people put up with .Let me clarify,

i really don't see any point in exchanging pleasantries just for the sake of not being thought of as socially retarded and if you see me exhibiting a sense of enlightened detachment when i'm supposed to be listening to you, that's your cue to quit talking.
The fact that i'm stuck studying a corpse of a syllabus in a not so reputed institution doesn't help either.There is hardly any room for stimulating bits of conversation.I'm not complaining though since i do have quite a few good mates that make the misery slightly less apparent.

Looking through this entry i know some of it sounds contradictory and i realise i havent thought this particular entry through at all.This is just something i quickly jotted down because i don't like to see my blog empty which would defeat the purpose of having one in the first place.I will write often but i probably won't post all of them.Infact chances are that i''ll average around a dozen a year,give or take.If the math is right there's going to be quite a hiatus between posts,quite unlike your average blogger.Adios for now then.