tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833411083213663905.post4707871053017459855..comments2023-10-25T03:20:00.692-07:00Comments on Eternal Sunshine of the Thoughtless Mind: Modern TimesSudipto Basuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00272783734959529945noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833411083213663905.post-57528687081147977112009-07-05T10:24:43.425-07:002009-07-05T10:24:43.425-07:00No need for the apologies, Kaushik-da. You must be...No need for the apologies, Kaushik-da. You must be knowing by now of my long-evident affinity for long posts!<br /><br />Charlie had been, both as himself and the Tramp, a model citizen in that he never deliberately harmed anyone (at least when he could avoid it). Anti-authoritarian and ecclesiastic yet conscientious and responsible; he was a tax-paying American who publicly rallied for his nation, as he had accepted it, even though he did not morally sanction warfare (and the War): at most, an urgent measure to contain fascism. The Tramp did bend a few rules - deliberately? - but seldom did he cause anyone a tiny morsel of unhappiness.<br /><br />As for Gandhiji, he remained ignorant of the joys of films throughout his whole life (yes, sadly for me!). The only two movies that have been graced (as recorded by Louis Fischer) by the Mahatma's audience are <i>Mission to Moscow</i> (which he dismissed because it had "improper"-ly dressed ballerinas) and <i>Ram Rajya</i> (he presumably enjoyed its idealistic overtones). No Chaplin magic! But had he known of the Tramp's ordeals with the law, I am guessing he would smile widely and grow fond of the man. No stranger to bending and breaking unjust legal impositions, he would probably connect intuitively with that freakish individualistic streak. And after all, he'd have noticed how many lives (onscreen and offscreen) the Tramp had blessed with unconditional joy: so little disapprovals of kicks, mock-punches and likewise aside, I've no trouble imagining how MKG would adore Charlie! :)Sudipto Basuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272783734959529945noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833411083213663905.post-31432866145366284092009-07-04T10:34:43.665-07:002009-07-04T10:34:43.665-07:00Yes, as Sudipto has brilliantly explained, there i...Yes, as Sudipto has brilliantly explained, there is a quaint bit of our selves, often sleeping and indiscernible, that lurks inside us, frowned and berated by everything that is on the right side of law; that forges an easy and immediate connect with the Tramp, that quintessentially identifiable Charlie, a quirky, desperate, freak, very ordinary otherwise, who would more often than not, bend, rather than break the rules of the game, cock a snook at the authority, with an impish innocence, run free from following the usual prescriptions of the society, be caned and caged, to finally let his spirit soar aloft as it redeems itself in the final trials of life.<br /><br />When the institution, the law, the society, their attendant trappings are repressive and unfair, imposed and intimidating, when the ‘master machine’ dehumanizes life and snuffs out the essence of liberty and innovativeness in man, and fails to address the core concerns of life and livelihood, the spirit of the tramp, his truant charm of defiance, symbolizes the eventual triumph of the very spirit of humankind against all arbitrary and absurd institutional machinations. <br /><br />Here again, the sheer unnaturalness and piquancy of the situation, generates a kind of indulgent permissiveness to the free-riding, law-defying, deviant character of the tramp! When “ order is injustice, disorder is the beginning of justice ”… “ When there is hunger and poverty and unemployment, you do get my subaltern sympathy when you steal the odd loaf for your family and short-shrift your store master to bring a smile or two to your loved ones”. <br /><br />However, it is worthwhile to be wary of situations when this fine line of distinction grows a bit tenuous and grey. Even under ordinary circumstances of society, when the laws and regulations are responsive and fair in that they curb the licentious in us while encouraging the spirit of the libertarian, there is still an inveterately odd, squeaky, escapist and street-smart element in us which tries to hold the rules of the society’s game to ransom, in order to gain a free leeway to enjoying cheap its odd crumbs (of pelf and popularity)! <br /><br />While we generally like to chaff and chide at the ‘herd-mentality’ that reduces our society to mundane mediocrity, it is instructive to remember also, that often the silent, subservient, peaceful, law-abiding, propensity of our vast multitudes, is but the pivotal and adhesive element that sustains the very fabric of our society, to allow a few odd path breakers to take it, through unexpected twists and turns, to altogether newer and higher gradients of achievement! <br /><br />You informed us of MKG’s salutary notes on machines, leaving a profound mark on Chaplin to inspire him to script such a spirited and heretical commentary on the ‘modern times’ (particularly, when you consider that he had the gall to highlight the ill-effects of mechanization, when ‘involuntary unemployment’ as a Keynesian would put it, was staring on your face in the aftermath of the “Great Depression”). I was just wondering how and if, while deeply empathizing with the brilliance of the freakish charm of the Tramp, the acutely conscientious, ethical and the moralist grain in MKG would also stand guard against the deliberate and mischievous transgression of rules of the society putting it, often, to no less peril! <br /><br />My sincere apologies for this rather longish entry!<br /><br />My Love <br />Kaushik-daKaushik Chatterjeehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08712252983920471892noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8833411083213663905.post-52857658290679245002009-06-26T12:46:09.872-07:002009-06-26T12:46:09.872-07:00It was a splendid experience watching this film (t...It was a splendid experience watching this film (thanks to you!). Truly, there were sequences in this film that made me want to laugh and cry at the same time. Obviously, if not impossible, it’s very very difficult to express both amusement and sorrow at the same time. Naturally, it must be far more difficult to make others want to do so. And, hence, I’m not the first one to bow to the artistic genius of Chaplin out of clear admiration and awe.<br /><br />I surely couldn’t have written such a deft synopsis as you have done, Sudipto. But, there are some random thoughts on a few scenes from the film that I’d like to share:<br /><br />1) There is this scene of the Tramp singing towards the end of the film, as you have mentioned. He acts while singing and all of us (on and off screen) who witness this thoroughly enjoy it and what more, understand it (a juicy story indeed!), even though what we hear is perfect lingual gibberish. We love the music and we love his acting even more. Well, Chaplin may have well pointed out the general attitude of the populace towards mindless entertainment. As the drudgery of industrialisation brings a close to individualism and art, giving way to the hopeless herd-instincts of modern times, people become more inclined to have a good share of raw fun without having to put in a lot of effort or brains. A good example may be what the TV soaps and shows drivel into the society today. Gibberish is the last thing that anyone cares about. Again, Chaplin might have also meant to convey that in order to give a good healthy laugh and a pure entertainment, one need not utter sense. After all, there is so much sense in non-sense at times (you know what I mean, Sudipto)!<br /><br />2) We also have this scene inside the jail, when the minister and his wife come to pay their weekly visit. The tramp and the minister’s wife sit alongside, sipping tea. The tramp, as usual, a bit clumsy in his state, awkward, humble and looking poorer than ever beside the big Mem. She, the usual petite, polite, grim-faced, status-conscious lady of the 30’s, who has her nose almost always pointed up in the air, her manicured hands always covered in gloves and her short wavy hair covered under hats. She is the sort who thinks an impulsive smile or laugh is an unforgivable offence (in fact, her smile/laugh is always preceded by a proper scrutiny of the subject head-to-foot). Well, such is the situation when suddenly she feels the acids churning up her oddly indecent digestive systems. Her puppy hears the sound and tries to bark it off, which she quietens with an irritated “shoo”. It’s the Tramp’s turn now. A great deal of bubbling is heard from the depths of an unseen ally, yet once again. This time, the puppy barks off the new sound. In utter need of some other source of sound, the Tramp turns on the radio. But, even the radio takes the digestive problem of the duo seriously: “And, in case, you suffer from gastroenteritis...” Embarrassed, he soon turns it off. After a minute or two, the minister’s wife leaves with her husband, fumbling and faltering, thoroughly decomposed, forgetting the-offence-of-smiling and smiling a bit too widely as she shakes hands with the commissioner. <br /><br />It might be Chaplin’s own way of saying through the Tramp’s portrayal, “ Well, dear lady, I may not have the aura of your style, but that doesn’t stop you from having the intestines of my style!”Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com