Sunday, 19 December 2010

Sun of the Winter

She stood close to him,
Him – her Sun.
He touched her on the right cheek.
She looked up at him.
And let him touch the left cheek too.
Her face grew warm.
She closed her eyes and surrendered herself.
The Sun kissed her eyes, her brows, her forehead…
She untied her hair,
And looked up at him again.
He kissed her face, her mouth, her ears…
Her mouth fell open.
The Sun kissed her throat, her neck, her hands.
Behind her closed eyes,
The Sun was slowly becoming a havoc of orange.
She could breathe the warmth of his breath,
Feel him growing warm along with her.
Her lips trembled with happiness.
Her Being glowed with fulfillment.
She stood there taking his love.
The Sun of the winter went on pouring life into her,
Setting her ablaze.


13/12/2009

Tuesday, 14 December 2010

How much can spoilers spoil?

Rohit's comment in the previous post prompted this, though I have long debated with myself and others on the topic.

I have written some reviews to have slightly experimented with the art of writing. My initial style was to completely describe the plot, including the smaller details I have noticed, and then intermittently add comments where I had any. This, of course, made reading easier. One could read without seeing the film at all and yet understand more or less everything I said. I abandoned that for chiefly two reasons: first, it took a lot of time to write, and second, it took away some of the reader's joy in discovering the details by himself/herself.

Next, I focussed more on technique (for example, my review of Kurosawa's High and Low commented at length on cinematography and blocking, and included screenshots on which I made comments now and then) while retaining a basic outline of the plot. I was more or less happy with this, except some of my oldest readers told me that they had trouble understanding where I was getting at. To put it more clearly: analysing the script (or story, as some would say) primarily, with little notes of cinematography, editing, music and mise-en-scene maybe, makes a review less cryptic to the general reader.

Now, some of my favourite writers on film take completely different approaches to provoking interest in the reader. For example, Baradwaj Rangan, in his section on foreign films (which is what I've read most on his blog), usually discusses the opening few minutes of the film in detail and leaves the reader to discover the rest for himself (Part of the Picture). This is, I think, a good enough approach though it cannot be applied when one wants to comment on the whole film.

The approach that I have now decided to use for reviewing a film (as opposed to, say, comment on the thematic connections within different films of a director) is one that combines elements of both approaches I spoke of in the second and third para. I write the plot in some detail, at least enough for me to make a few comments on the way characters develop in the course of the film. I leave out the tiny bits than delight me so that the reader can discover them on their own. I really don't want to deny anyone that joy!

I still assume that some people object to spoilers. So I'll briefly question the significance of plot in film. My own take is that, thrillers and mysteries excluded, the knowledge of the events on screen rarely diminishes the experience of watching. (How and why is more important than what.) If anything, it takes our attention off the framework and allows us to notice the details. You could of course complain if I spoil a Hitchcock film, but an S Ray? I don't think so.

P.S. - Specifically on Ray and my review of Kanchenjungha, I have gained confidence that two of the best writers on the director - Andrew Robinson and John H Wood - have followed an approach similar to mine in their books.

Monday, 13 December 2010

Beyond the Apu Trilogy: Kanchenjungha

Satyajit Ray crowds the discussion on serious Indian cinema to such an extent that it is almost useless to write again on his films. But then, few filmmakers have had such an impact on me as him. So this post is mainly an exercise in articulating my own reasons for admiring him. Bear me as such. In my defence, I may have a few good bits on what you already know.

From the point-of-view of the Westerner, the Apu trilogy is supposedly Ray’s most significant contribution. While the merits of those three films are undeniable, I see little point in writing about them. I’ll write about some of the others that I consider great and have a personal affinity for.

**
The urchin in Kanchenjungha (1962).

An upper-class Calcutta family has come to the hill-station of Darjeeling to spend a vacation. The narrative encompasses the day before their planned departure. The patriarch is a relic of the Raj: educated, rich businessman with a title (presumably for co-operating with the British rulers, or making a sizeable donation to the coffers) and a vain, insensitive ego. He wants to have his younger daughter – Manisha, who is sensitive, soft-spoken and just 19 – married to a well-to-do engineer with some social status and security. This underlines the significance and urgency of the day. All events in the films ultimately center upon what decision Manisha makes. The suitor is an amiable man possibly in his 30s – Banerjee – a little too formal, somewhat pragmatic though overall likeable.

The patriarch, Indranath Roy, has a sensitive wife in Labanya. She has long turned spontaneity and self-esteem inwards, submissively putting on a façade of agreement with everything her husband says and does. She doesn’t seem to be too happy with the present situation Manisha has been forced into, yet she cannot bring herself to oppose her husband on his stand. Labanya’s brother, Jagadish, is a cheerful, philosophical man who likes to stay alone with his passion – bird-watching. The contrast between Jagadish and his brother-in-law is etched in a wonderful comic scene where he tries to arouse some ornithological interest in Indranath. “Can the bird be roasted?” Indranath asks. For a moment, Jagadish cannot fathom the question. When he says no, Indranath smugly says that the bird does not interest him in that case.

Manisha’s elder sister, Anima, has an unhappy marriage with Shankar. We come to know more things about them as the film progresses, but it is established in the first few minutes that Shankar is cynical about the family’s subservience to Indranath as well as his failed marriage. He also reveals shades of concern that Mani might be emotionally manipulated to accept Banerjee as her husband inspite of her true wishes. Anima and Shankar have a daughter of about eight, which is what anchors their relationship inspite of personal differences. Manisha’s other sibling is Anil, a somewhat stupid and happy-go-lucky fellow who chases pretty girls in Darjeeling’s famed Mall. Anil is incidentally the only character in the film whom Ray does not put under the scanner. He is a prototype for the spoilt rich-brat and has little function other than drawing a few easy laughs.

A key to understanding the film from the POV of a westerner is to recognize the typical Indian social mindset that craves security and social standing above all else. It might be slightly confounding to wonder why no one in the family has ever spoken against Indranath’s tyranny. Disagreement stains the façade of family integrity, which no one wants to jeopardize. The fear of breaking an accepted social structure – where the patriarch decides everything – also permeates their mind. No one enjoys this patriarchal supremacy, except Indranath of course, but everyone buries the frustration deep within. Kanchenjungha is, in a way, a search for someone who will have the courage to break the existing social structure.

As a counterpoint to the society-conscious Choudhury family, Ray introduces Ashok, a young graduate from the lower-middle class who earns a pittance by tutoring students. This profession he seems to have in common with a pushy uncle who forms the distant link between him and the Choudhury family. In Darjeeling accompanying his uncle, who is comically unimaginative in the manner of most middle-class babus, he comes across Indranath. The uncle is an old acquaintance of the Choudhurys and wants Indranath, chairman of five companies, to help his young nephew get a job. That Ashok is something of a rebel is already evident within moments of his arrival on screen. When introduced to the big man, he stands straight hesitantly, not doing the “done thing”: i.e. bowing down and paying obeisance (which is the standard Indian custom). It takes his over-eager uncle’s urging to do that.

The events of the day unfold as all these characters walk about the lonely streets of Darjeeling in pairs or alone, coming across one another by chance, then relapsing back into solitude. Ray employs a cyclical structure: he captures a bit of the conversation between Banerjee and Manisha, then switches over to Indranath and Labanya. Then he suddenly brings in a roaming Ashok face-to-face with Banerjee and Manisha, and so forth. The dialogue is written keeping this cycle in mind, so that when Labanya voices her concern that Manisha may have wishes of her own and may not be ideal for Banerjee, we have already seen hints of the clash between Manisha’s natural whimsical nature and Banerjee’s formal politeness.

The true genius of Kanchenjungha is, I think, how Ray pairs almost every principal character with some other at one point or the other, thereby contrasting and comparing their nature and the relationship they share. Also, nearly every character is given a distinct life of his or her own (they could be people we have met ourselves), which is somewhat unusual considering that the narrative is tightly controlled and organized (though that is not apparent on the surface).

Kanchenjungha was Ray’s first film in colour. That Mani chooses a saffron sari to wear on this ‘important’ day already hints that she doesn’t wholly approve of her father’s choice – saffron being the colour of renunciation in Hinduism. We do not yet know if she will accept Banerjee’s proposal, but she wants to make her resignation clear. Darjeeling’s natural beauty is shrouded in mist, which adds a sense of gloom and confusion, thereby reflecting the mood of the characters. I’m not entirely sure the same effects could be achieved on black-and-white stock.

If the film is a document of an old social structure disintegrating, it also marks the birth of several relationships. It is revealed that Anima has an extra-marital affair that she has sustained from before her marriage (she could not marry her lover against her father’s wishes). Shankar has learnt of this, but typically stomachs the failure with his cynical resignation to fate. He has several vices – gambling and drinking among others – which he inherited from his zamindari heritage, but he shows signs of silent remorse. Husband and wife confront each other, break down and while the final reconciliation is far from cheerful, it shows signs of hope that each will try to become better partners. Their daughter – who in her innocence does not realize the tension between her parents and continually punctuates their tragic confrontation with cheerful cries – convinces them to start anew. Manisha and Ashok have only been introduced, but they find some common ground. This engenders not so much a romantic relationship, not quite a friendship, but curiosity enough to explore each other in future. Mani invites Ashok to her house in Calcutta.

The breaking of patriarchal supremacy happens in three separate blows to Indranath’s ego. The most poignant of these is his own wife’s. Left alone for some time, Labanya gives full voice to her pain and frustration in a melancholic song by Tagore. As her saddened voice echoes off the valley, her brother Jagadish silently walks up to her. When she finishes, he says with a smile that she has not sung like that for years. Labanya, like many Bengali girls, has a sweet voice (which is somewhat true even to this day) but her devotion to family has throttled any caprice she had. Somewhat ironically, this is the only defiance that Indranath does not learn of. Even in rebellion, Labanya has preserved family integrity.

Ashok delivers the most surprising of these blows. Though romantic and idealistic by nature, he also craves some of the security that his middle-class peers so desperately want. Forced by his uncle, he reluctantly tails Indranath in some hope of getting the promise of a job. He swallows the businessman’s condescension and patronizing attitude for some time, but ultimately summons enough courage to laugh at his face when he is handed a concrete offer. Of course he’ll have to slog off for some years more, but he much prefers to be self-made than be someone’s fool forever. Indranath cannot understand how someone with low social status can so easily defy him: the look of confusion on his face rivals Jagadish’s astonishment during the early bird-roasting episode.

Manisha’s refusal to cave in to familial pressure probably pains Indranath the most, because he never imagined his daughter having will of her own. It is commendable of Ray that the development of Mani’s character does not seem abrupt. She does not so much reject Banerjee as just keep him waiting. On his part, Banerjee reveals depths as the narrative progresses. While seemingly shallow at first, we gradually see that he is basically a honest and decent fellow. In one of my favourite exchanges, he gives Mani a rare flower she had been looking for. When she asks if he sought it out, he pretends for a moment to have made a painstaking search. Then he feels compelled to admit being helped by a botanist in his hotel. His final words are equally touching. “Maybe these romantic surroundings make you think that love is the most important thing in the world. But once you're back in Calcutta if you ever feel that security is better than love, or that love can grow out of security then let me know.” Banerjee is part of the traditional social structure, but he shows the best traits of it.

Ray ties the film together with a little native urchin who pesters passers-by for alms. The song accompanying the opening title credits is a folk tune sung by this boy. When Banerjee and Mani begin their walk, the boy tails them for a while before giving up. Banerjee had placed a bet with Mani that he would give her a chocolate bar if they did not get to see Kanchenjungha before leaving for the city. After Mani refuses his proposal, he makes his way back alone. The urchin tails him again. Banerjee had forgotten about the chocolate bar in all the confusion. He smilingly gives it to the boy. Magically, not long after, the mists clear and Kanchenjungha is seen. Ironically Indranath, who was most keen about the range, does not have the mood to enjoy the vista anymore. The film ends with the urchin singing the same song that played at the start, this time smiling as he relishes the bar of chocolate.

In its own way, Kanchenjungha also comments on the relationship between nature and man. Ashok says he had the courage to refuse the job only because he is in Darjeeling. In Calcutta, he most probably would have accepted the offer. Nature gives him the inspiration to be true to his conscience, just as it probably guided Mani in her defiance. Jagadish, of course, is the classic example of a man happy in his co-existence with nature. Indranath, with his superficial touristy enthusiasm about the Kanchenjungha peak, is the only disappointed person at the end.

Cast:
Chhabi Biswas: Indranath Choudhury
Karuna Banerjee: Labanya, wife
Anil Chatterjee: Anil, son
Alaknanda Roy: Monisha, unmarried daughter
Anubha Gupta: Anima, elder daughter
Arun Mukherjee: Ashoke, young man from Calcutta
Subrata Sen: Shankar, Anima's husband
Sibani Singh: Tuklu, Shankar and Anima's daughter
Vidya Sinha: Anil's girlfriend
Pahari Sanyal: Jagadish, Labanya's brother
N. Viswanathan: Mr. Banerjee, Manisha's suitor
Guinye: street urchin

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

Vatican condemns Facebook

The Vatican released a statement on Halloween this year to protest against the rising influence of Facebook on today's generation. The Church condemned the popular social networking site citing that the growing obsession with Facebook has derailed the attention devout Christians should be giving to God and Good.

In his editorial piece on the Vatican newspaper the Pope also insinuated that Facebook creates walls around people, drawing them away from each other. He condemned the absurdity sometimes evident in Facebook conversations - where people sitting in adjacent rooms often exchange messages to ask if they'd like to have coffee together.

The Pope further decried what he saw as covert promotion of bad habits - like writing on the wall and poking each other endlessly. He said, "Facebook poses a new problem to Christian parents. Now that every newborn is exposed to the harmful effects of Facebook from an early age, it may become difficult to control the vile habits of little children. That day is not far away when children will want a separate wall in their rooms in which they'll write and scribble - often inanities like 'lukin ht babes, muaaahzzz!' - and, to add insult to injury, which will also be liked by his/her friends. Also, the poke functionality irks me a lot. What will these children learn? For all I know, they may poke whoever is sitting in the front seat of the bus just to draw attention!"

The Vatican's chief exorcist, Father Gabriele Amorth (who indignantly clarified that he hated the band Amon Amarth), alleged in his supportive letter to the editor that he sensed an uncanny presence of one Robert Langdon in the viral surge in popularity of Facebook. He was quoted as saying, "Think about it! Both Mr. Langdon and Mr. Zuckerberg went to the same college, Harvard. I sense something wrong. Besides, if you connect the dots, you realise that both of them have a deep grudge against religion. Mr. Zuckerberg professes atheism, and I haven't yet forgiven Mr. Langdon for his painstaking adventure that revealed one Sophie Neveu to be a blood relative of Our Saviour. I hate them both!" Off the record, he professed that he thought Audrey Tatou was hot.

Acknowledgement: Avishek Basu Mallick for the idea.
Post-script: For more on Langdon and Facebook, head here.

Thursday, 7 October 2010

Senility

I had a dream today, I'll tell you about that.
I want to go up the hills again, I'm tired of lands flat.
The hills are high and clean and cold, and they are very nice.
In case you want a cooler drink, you have lots of ice.

The roads wind up and down the mountains in ways totally devious,
And flatland drivers sulk so much on wasted experience previous.
The hairpin bends are a real pain, especially in the morn.
When the air is foggy, the windscreen soggy, so please honk your horn.

In hills untraced, with roads braced, a hotel built at great height
Might prove lucrative in times unseen, but only with foresight.
The flow of travellers in the first few seasons might seem like a trickle,
But one might also turn successful, with help from chance fickle.

A good chef in the kitchen is one sure formula
To attract to the hotel guests, and to the cashbox moolah.
Keep a spacious terrace or two, and a nicely trimmed lawn,
Guests'll gather together there to watch sunrise at dawn.
Among other things, efficiency in service is a keeper.
(A small tip: People prefer hotels that are cheaper!)

Anyway, this dream of mine isn't castle-in-the-air.
After a prime well-spent, I'd like to sit idly in a chair -
Maybe read my favourites, or listen to a tune,
(I hope you'll pardon me for dreaming big so soon.)
Might even invite friends that I've gathered across years,
Sit together around a fire and share laughs and tears.
Y'see, life in the cities involves so many tricks,
I'd want to be left alone when I've had my fix.

On pleasant wintry evenings, I'll sometimes take a walk.
When there's languor in the hilly air, and also in the clock.
So if I ever meet you on one of those lonely routes,
You're welcome as ever to my place to warm your frozen boots.

Monday, 4 October 2010

Face/off: Prose and verse

If you consider them in their own places,
I think both of these have good cases.
In fact, a neutral observer should
See that both of them are good!

Poetry has its own norm,
Rhyme and rhythm are its form.
Prose, on the other hand,
Is easier to understand.

Consider for a while,
(No doubt with a wry smile)
A defendant standing before court,
And presenting in defence quote
After quote of lucid rhyme.
The judge loses sense of time,
And, next in line, logic.
(You see, the judge in question is a failed poet.
And the defendant seems to know it.)
Which only makes the verdict tragic -
The defendant did commit a crime,
He killed a poet past his prime.

Consider a surgeon removing a tumour.
He asks the nurse
In perfect verse
To pass the roll of bandage.
With the unfortunate disadvantage
That he laughs out in great humour,
Which makes his hands shake and swerve.
And the patient has a bruised nerve.

Also think of such a case.
A general in an army base
Briefing his men of their mission.
With great pride, he narrates his vision
Of defending his territory and doing his country proud.
Then he takes the fatal step, he lets emotions shroud
The driving energy of his speech, and the crowd
Follows suit. They cry out loud
As the general slips into lucid rhyme.
All the while, through mud and grime
Enemy soldiers reach the base.
Which now stands a desolate place.

As you see, even as I admire
Verse, consequences dire
Might result from the victory
Of rhymed and rhythmic poetry.

Written as a riposte to K-da's note.

Sunday, 3 October 2010

Rhymes: For a few dimes more...

On the Uncommon Wealth Games:
What happened: I posted a BBC link containing embarrassing photos of the games village. Sudhang posted that conditions have improved since then, that inspite of mismanagement and corruption Delhi has drastically improved after many years. What might have been a debate got heated, and Sudhang said that he didn't want to continue the argument anymore. What follows is the poetic conclusion.

Sudhang:
I bade thee adieu.
And though you're mistaken
I remain unshaken;
I shan't start the conversation anew.
 
Me:
Since you insist so much,
I'll admit it as such.
Whatever I say
Doesn't change shit.
Why not call it a day,
And from this argument quit?

Why annoy a friend,
As I chase till the end
What has already been said?!
(Besides) For this, I'm not even paid.

You might be true.
And then I might rue
That I lost a good pal.
Can we meet up when you next come to Cal?

(The last line is, of course, my signature way of ending a rhyme on an irrelevant note.)

Double class: viewed through a looking glass
What happened: I was sitting in a double-period, a continuous drawl that went on for two hours. The experience of it.

Juggling words in weariness,
Trying to escape the dreariness
Of listening to a boorish teacher.
Grown tired of this babbling creature.
Time moves in a slow, languid manner,
Which, needless to say, throws a spanner
To my plans of having a good day,
And, while the sun shines, make hay.
All of that, I think, now goes haywire
As this man tries his best to tire
Each and everyone of us out.
Well, that's what this poem is about!

Among the various replies accumulated in the Facebook note, K-da was the only one pitching in with rhyme.

K-da:
The world of verse,
Whether pompous or terse,
Would be my forte.
'Twas a settlement reached out of court!

A small patch of grass,
Where I’ll lamely graze like the lethargic ass,
No shepherd to lord over me.
A quiet day after a full tummy!

Ambling across the lakes and leas,
A smug smile to wear,
Churning the rhymes in perfect bliss,
Ouch! the smile droops to a fear!

Who’s he? ah! no one, a small boy,
Want to learn something, ahoy!
Pithy verses, laced with wit.
Come-on, I’ll stand that little bit!

But oh! The boy or an angel coming to age,
With words and rhythm, rivaling the sage,
The good old days of the ruminant, gone!
Now it specializes in “chorbito chorbon”!

The last two words in Bengali roughly translate to "chewing what has been chewed" (I'm ignoring the implication that I might be a cow). Now I had to reply in verse, of course. Otherwise the whole fun would've gone. Came up with two.

Me:
In matters of wordplay and wit,
There are few who can quite hit
The levels of mastery you show.
That's something all of us know!

With words, you have a flair
(That) I'd be too happy to share.
But, of course, that's a wild dream!
Poetry comes slow, as ream upon ream
Of virtual paper is wasted.
And then some sort of success tasted.

So cheer up, and have a beer.
You're still the pioneer!
(Oh, assuming you like to drink!
If not, take it with a wink.)

Your verses still shine,
They're better than mine.
And if one is just short of divine,
Add a little polish and refine.
I'm sure that'll make it fine.
Oh damn, I can't write one more rhyming line!

Me, again:
An angel? Oh dear!
With every praise you gear
Towards hyperbole.
My insignificant role
Of a humourous prole
You send down the greatness-hole!

I much prefer to be the boy,
Who with his humour-sarcasm alloy,
Tears things down to bits:
From boring teachers to pop-hermits!
(I mean the celeb Guru of Yoga,
The one with stone-eye and saffron toga.)

Amusement is the only aim
And if, by chance, a little fame
Does stride up to me,
Who'm I to set it free?
And if someone does learn a slice
Wouldn't it be very nice?

But don't mourn the ruminant gone.
From its ashes, a cynic born
Shares his lop-sided worldview.
He sees the world with eyes anew.

To be honest, the ruminant was boring.
As he talked you could hear the snoring
Of those around him.
So he'd turn grim
And morose.
But then, he chose
To abandon prose.
(A chapter-close.)

 
Bogie:
What happened: This was spurred by the verbal portrait of me that Basu-da drew, while in conversation. I started with the intention of exaggerating his words. But in place of the archetypal hardboiled cynic, I ended up with the man I was modelling the poem on.
 
On his forehead, a deep frown.
A compulsive loner in tinseltown.
His utterances bitter, sardonic,
While he gulps down a gin and tonic.
Cool, steely, suave and smart,
Who's he but Humphrey Bogart?

First Crush:
Somebody wrote, "Experiencing my first crush".
Dude, I just hope you're not having your first brush
With compressive load!
#Joking civil-engg. mode

Random wisecrack on seeing someone's facebook status. Contains mild geek-humour, and complete irreverence for emotions. Be warned! Also, hashtags are wonderful, aren't they?

P.S.: Second roundup of facebook verses. Part 1 here.