It's all in the tale

I just finished reading two more books. Somehow my little blog is turning out to be all about books.( bookworm that I am) So these two I'm told are both "life changing" books. John Green author of "Fault In Our Stars" assures us that it is all fiction and he has tweaked facts to suit himself and that a story which is fiction can be life changing too. I agree. Some of my best philosophies are derived not from classic tomes but from fiction fiction. The other book - before I stray off the path- is Paulo Coelho's "Alchemist" about the shepherd boy in search of buried treasure which he does find after a journey in self discovery. It is, I quote "a magical fable about following your dream". At least that's what the book's cover tells me. I've to confess that nothing life altering has struck me down yet; no revelation has burst upon me and changed my life after reading them. I found "Fault In our stars" to be a sweet tender romance of 16-17 year olds trying to fight death (Old old story- remember Ankhiyon Ke Jharonko Se or better still Love Story) with heavy philosophy and doses of poetry thrust in. It is a fresh take on cancer patients and to some it has probably made a difference.(I'm too old I guess) Just as "The alchemist" I'm told has inspired many. Even the President of United States who swears by it. I believe he carries a copy of it around. Sorry. It didn't do a thing for me. Especially the line about the universe conspiring to get you what you want. It's not happening dude. Not to me. Not to a lot of people I know. Life is just giving us lot of sour lemons and we're trying to make lemonade with them only not succeeding I'm afraid. So call it a case of sour grapes or sour lemons - whichever you prefer. 

Maybe it's just sourpuss old me. 

But our fascination with magic, with fairy tales, with the paranormal, the supernatural, the other realm is never ending. Me included. I was a sucker for Cinderella when I was a kid(ages ago!) and I love Harry Potter. What lies behind it? A deeper search for meaning to this life on earth? Or just a desire to escape into a fantasy world where "happily ever after" exists? Because If Santiago in "Alchemist" had failed to find his treasure then maybe we wouldn't have tagged the book "life changing" right? Because we know there is no treasure at the end of the rainbow. But we like someone who tells us there is. So I guess it's a bit of both. The need to find some meaning to our lives as well as escape into the "happily ever after" fairy tales and supernatural worlds that offer tales of these splendid beings with amazing powers while in reality we labor on in Mr. Biswas's (Naipaulian) little universe. Slightly ridiculous, resilient, vulnerable, poignant and tragic beings fighting our little battles. And losing most of the time. 

What is your food-entity?

Yep. I did it just now. Coined a new word. Food +identity= Food- entity. So. I have just completed Interpreter of maladies by Jhumpa Lahiri. Not what I expected of an award winning novel. No intellectual gymnastics. No complexities. Just simple ordinary stories in simple lucid prose. Rather good I must say. And in her work I found constant references to food -whether it is Mrs. Das munching on puffed rice in the Interpreter or Mrs. Sen using her boti (shaped like the prow of a ship) to gut and slice fish and vegetables. Lahiri uses food to convey her Indian-ness. Her characters derive their sense of self( as i suspect she does) their roots from the food they eat. Food that clearly separates them from their American counterparts. In the rice, puffed or otherwise, in the spices, in the egg curry, fish curry or curried chicken they find their identities separate and distinct. It is what they hold on to in a foreign land. 

I found it a novel point of view. To think that food somehow connects you to your roots, to your self, gives you  your identity is a possibility I've never taken into account perhaps because I've taken my identity for granted. That I'm a Indian- Bengali has never been in question but to those settled in far flung places around the globe food becomes a way of life. Of staying in touch with your roots. In Lahiri's world food is not not merely what you eat but who you are. 

I thought back to the time when I read Enid Blytons as a child. References to muffins, scones, tarts were unfamiliar, unknown. But for today's generation exposed to an explosion of cuisines from all over the globe nothing is unfamiliar. Mexican, thai , chinese, Italian, French, Lebanese, American, Japanese- you name it we eat it. But our daily diet still consists of dal chawal subzi. So food does not occupy us in the same way it does an expat. To them it is a taste of home. Even though they maybe American Indians born and brought up there. 

To most Indians food is a big deal. It is our medium of expressing ourselves. It is an affirmation of life itself. Every occasion -joyous or sad- ( wedding, birth, death, festival) is marked by food. 

But for some it is also a means of clinging to their roots and finding their identity. Their food- entity. 

Fame or Bane?

I can't quite decide whether its a good thing to be known or unknown. To be noticed or be ignored. Most people will vote against the latter. To be ignored is some kind of humiliation which no-one wants to be stuck with. It is so much better when the world sits up and takes note of you. Then you're famous!! Heck who doesn't want to be famous? 
But I've begun to wonder. What happens when you get trapped in that fame? When you become a victim of it? When you can't break out of it no matter how much you try? 

You love Harry Potter. I love Harry potter. Everyone loves Harry Potter. With that series J.K. Rowling achieved unprecedented success. She did something magical with her books that no-one, no writer achieved. She made history. Broke all barriers of gender caste race color and reached out to millions of readers around the world. Male writers wondered how a woman writer could achieve that kind of success writing children's books, for God's sake! And in the commercial genre. Mind you its not an intellectual over- the- top series that is beyond the grasp of the common reader. Both the adults as well as the children love it. Both the literary discerning reader and the simple intellect of a child can enjoy it on different levels. 

I know. I know. You already know this. J.K. Rowling doesn't need my recommendation. She has established herself without any doubt. Since she ended the series she has written three more books. One a satire; two murder mysteries about PI Cormoran Strike. I've read Cuckoo's Calling. It's very well written. Cormoran Strike bounces off the pages vividly, almost a caricature but...but something's missing. In spite of her superior writing, command of the English language, in spite of her talent for portraits, her books haven't achieved even one fourth of Harry Potter's success. The latest I heard was she was now writing a story about the wicked headmistress of Hogwarts- Dolores Umbridge. Try as she might she can't break out of her own success. Will she eventually succeed? Remains to be seen. 

The hero of Harry Potter movies Daniel Radcliffe is floundering similarly- trying to do everything to break out of the mold his role has placed him in. He's trying out different roles - right from romantic to theater - to prove his metier. These are just two examples of so many. 

But the way I see it, in many ways fame is a bane. Because once you are famous you are expected to repeat that success. And you are expected to do that in precisely the way you've done it before. And before you know it there's no way out. That's why I can't decide. Better to be ignored or noticed. What do you think? www.facebook.com

Beaten into morality?

Just read the morning paper. Film fraternity protested against the anti drinking warnings to be displayed onscreen. That debate will rage on. It brings me to my question- can morality be enforced? Can you beat someone into being moral? Can you terrorize someone into being moral? The answer is sadly-yes. There has always been a deep correlation between fear and morality; from there to morality and religion. To most of mankind religion/ morality has its roots in awe and reverence and that awe unfortunately is mixed with heavy doses of fear. Men in caves worshipped thunder, lightning and fire- every phenomena that seemed inexplicable to them. We have God of thunder and lightning(Indra), Fire(Agni) Wind(Vayu) Sun(Surya). 

In its primitive stages then morality stemmed from fear. 

But that morality does not last. It cannot. Just as fear cannot. 

Any reign that begins in fear has to end. All religions preach one morality- that of love. And morality, true morality has to do more with being a sentient human being than anything else. Just as religion is a deeply private highly individual experience which cannot be translated into vocabulary of the masses. 

So can these reforms be implemented for the masses by the masses? Can the government stop people from smoking, drinking or raping by imposing punishments, fines and making rules? Can human beings give up their intrinsic nature if they are forced to be moral? Can a rapist stop raping? Can an alcoholic stop drinking and beating up his wife? Can a man who smokes stop to think of others around him? The answer I'm afraid is a resounding -No. People will continue to drink smoke and rape and commit crimes but they will do so in ways that will circumvent laws. 

Is there no use then to these attempts to civilize society? At least some degree of awareness is being generated. People might ignore these slogans and continue on their merry way to hell but at least in public places they won't be able to smoke and kill ten others with themselves; a rapist will know he is in for a long time in jail for ruining a woman for life and very quickly; that there are no loopholes for a crime so heinous; a murderer will hesitate to commit murder. 

Fear then is a useful deterrent for the masses who aren't capable of being sentient human beings. They aren't capable of self control. They need to be curbed externally because they are incapable of internal control. To that end these warnings  and rules are okay. But for real morality to begin one needs to define limits,( or to rise above them as the case maybe) to redefine the meaning of "human being." Only those capable of thinking for themselves, of rational behavior, of looking inwards can start being moral in the real sense of the word. Being beaten into morality is not the real answer. Only the beginning to social reform. Perhaps. Because human nature being what it is, vice in its many forms will continue to exist. We can only try to ensure that it touches as few as possible. But ultimately the choice rests with the individual. To embrace it or let it go. And I've been told by many wise that it is harder to let go. 

Are you moral? Do you want to be? Can you be? It is a boring arduous process with absolutely no bouquets, only brickbats. No awards. No applause. Just a continuous grappling with yourself not to slip. Are you up to it? Very few are. 

www.facebook.com

Portrayal of Women in Movies And T.V.

We have entered the twenty first century. Gone on space missions. Done incredible things in science and advanced by leaps. But somehow our perception of women has not altered much. Note. I have said not altered much. I haven't said "not at all." Both our visual mediums- T.V and films- have now moved from portraying women from sobbing sari clad sati- savitris ( Meena Kumari era) to  radical shot- guzzling cigarette smoking emancipated feminists whose only claim to emancipation lies not in intellectual superiority to their male counterparts( Oh no! Females are almost never capable of out thinking or out maneuvering them) but in being free to compete in downing innumerable shots with men and hopping in and out of their beds. It is passe to be a virgin, to have any moral values. The image of heroines in films favored currently being sluttish. Equality then boils down to sexual, in some cases financial, but never intellectual emancipation. A woman is never shown to be intellectually equal, let alone superior to a male. Does that tell you something? It does to me. Being a woman I find it highly insulting. Why does a woman need a man to rescue her from every situation? I have no objection to the man in question supplying the muscles but the brains? Come on. History bears witness that some of the women rulers were the shrewdest. Elizabeth the bastard queen who maneuvered her way to the throne, Margaret Thatcher, our very own Indira Gandhi. So why is it we cannot show women more intelligently? Why when we do so we resort to revamped prototypes? No matter how much alcohol or wine they may drink, no matter how many cigarettes they smoke, what positions they occupy in the corporate world they cannot rid themselves of the tag of sexual objects. Out maneuvering is always depicted in sexual terms where the woman ensnares the man using sex, and blinds him to reason in a cloud of passion. It is never a case of sharp hard intellect fighting intellect. Never a case of brains outwitting brains. In TV the change is slower to happen. Women are shown to be sari clad and venturing into a brand new world but ...but with the man's support or the family's. Nothing wrong with that. Only nowhere is it shown that the man shares the household duties with his wife when she works outside to augment the family income. Again that should tell you something. It is still the woman's job to manage family home and a job. It is taken for granted that every woman is a superwoman who can and should multitask. Why? 

Divorce and remarriage of women are now no longer taboo on TV. Every middle class home now endorses the end of a bad relationship. But before real change begins we should change the way in which we perceive ourselves. Because once women begin to admit that we are not mere sexual objects then and only then things will change. 

I'd love to see a movie or TV serial in which a woman ousts a man because of her superior intellect. Not because she is a pretty face or has a great smile. Or can match the man in downing innumerable shots or announcing her sexual emancipation. 

What color are you?

Pigeonholing is something we just love to do. Slot humankind into neat little categories. According to gender, race, color, capability(gifted, failure,loser),financial status, background, caste, creed- it goes on and on. We are not content until we have put everyone into pigeon holes. Today I'm going to deal with only one category. The color of your skin. 

Earlier it was the white race which dominated the world.They were thought to be automatically superior because of the color of their skin. Even today Indians cannot quite shake off their fascination for the white skinned. Then gradually other skins began to grow in prominence- oops other races, I mean. The olive skinned( largely Mediterranean and some European), the yellow skinned( Japanese, Chinese, South east Asians), the red skinned(The Red Indians), the brown skinned(Indians) and finally the black skinned(Africans). The world had very neatly been divided on basis of the color of skins. 

But consider the absolute contrariness of human nature. Perpetually dissatisfied with what we have; the whites were not happy with the way they looked. They set out to tan and broil themselves in the sun to turn their skins into shades of bronze, copper or if they got lucky with the melanin content in their skin, a deep brown. Sunbathing is THE most popular thing in the West. While what were those lucky people with brown or black skin doing? Bleaching the hell out of themselves. Wearing sunblocks. Using whitening creams by the gallons. Trying to get whiter and whiter day by day.( See that fair and lovely advertisement?) 

The marriage market demands fair beautiful girls or fair handsome men in India where arranged marriages are still the norm. I really wish the whites would consider doing a skin swap with the Indians. It would fulfill both their immediate desires- one to turn brown and the other to turn blindingly white. All without hours spent in the sun or buying dozens of skin whitening creams. 

What about the others? The olive skins or the yellow skins? What are their grouses? I don't know. Being an Indian I only know what our people want. But I'm sure being human they must have some. Dissatisfaction is the mantra of human nature no matter which part of the globe people might reside in. 

Whatever one might say the Indian reverence for fair or white skinned people is not likely to diminish in the near future. Nor is the Western obsession with tan. The only way out as I can see is a swap. Any takers?

The most difficult genre- comedy

It started quite simply in the beginning- this genre game. There were two genres -tragedy and comedy. And all fiction was listed under either of the two headings. Dramas, poetry, literature - everything fell under these two categories. Like everything today it has changed. There are so many genres, sub-genres, and sub-sub- genres that one feels quite dizzy. I've to confess to my shame that till not very long ago I had no idea what chick- lit meant and I had to actually google the meaning. Slightly more enlightened I browsed categories like noir, nocturne, chick lit, suspense-police procedurals, women sleuths, international crime & mystery, detective, new adult, young adult, middle ages, kids- the list is endless. It is gratifying to see how very organized and specialized we've become. But it is also very bewildering.

 Today however I'm going to deal with only one genre- comedy. This is a genre that has invoked my respect over the years  because I've realized just how difficult it is to raise a laugh. You'll say it is the easiest thing in the world. But it is not. Really. Real comedy, the vintage kind, where the humor is situational- arising from the series of events in the story- is very rare these days. Most  literature or films these days rely on sex, physical deformities, or crude vulgarity to raise a few laughs. Humor is a dying art. 

I can't remember the last time I laughed aloud while reading a book or watching a movie. I think the last truly funny movie I saw was Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro. It was ages ago but it is still the best comedy I've seen. It was both a satire and comedy which is not an easy feat to achieve. The next movie I sincerely thought was funny was Golmaal. Not the new one but the old one. And so far I haven't seen or read anything that can match these. The comedy serials on TV - both Indian & Phoren - are quite pathetic. One can hardly bear to sit through the crude sex related jokes and the mind sapping humor. Hangover II -or was it III(?)- was one of the worst movies I've had to endure. It is a rare movie that can send me to sleep but this one did. 

We need laughs so desperately that we are becoming rather desperate to raise them. What happened to subtle tongue- in- cheek humor, or situational comedy NOT involving SEX? We are waiting to someone to take the center stage and show us what real comedy is. I'm waiting for someone to replace Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro. Any takers? 

That said I still maintain that it is easier to elicit tears than laughter. Real laughter that can bring tears to your eyes and make you hold your stomach. Without crudity. Without vulgarity.