वेयर इज द फ्रेंड्स होम ?

टिप्पणी: जब हम हिंदी बोलते हैं तो कभी नहीं लगता कि कोई तर्जु़मा चल रहा है। पर जब लिखने की बात आती है तो साफ़ दिखता है कि हिंदी से पकड़ बिल्कुल छूट गयी है। अंग्रेजी के शब्दों का अनुवाद करना पड़ता है। अब ये भी समझ मैं नहीं आता कि innocence को भोलापन लिखे या अज्ञानता लिखे या फिर पवित्रता ही लिख डालें। या उर्दू का सहारा लेके मासूमियत या बेगुनाही लिखे। कुछ समय पहले मैं सोचता था कि भाषा का प्रयोग अगर बातचीत में होता रहे तो अच्छा है। बोलने की भाषा घर में प्रयोग होने वाले बर्तनों की तरह है जो रोज़ाना काम में आने से चमकते रहते हैं, ना की महंगे चाइना के टी-सेट की तरह जो विशेष मेहमानों के आने पर संदूक या अलमारी से निकाले जाते हैं। पर इस बात पर आज संशय होता है। बोलना भर काफी़ नहीं, लिखना पढ़ना बहुत ज़रूरी है। ये बात कोई नयी नहीं, पर आज सही से समझ में आई है। तो इस पोस्ट को अपने को हिंदी भाषी कहने वाले नौसिखिये मित्र का प्रयास भर समझे ।

हालांकि अब्बास किअरास्तामी की फिल्म वेयर इज द फ्रेंड्स होम ? (दोस्त का घर कहॉ है?) बच्चों की फिल्म लगती है पर इस फिल्म में कहीँ कहीँ लगभग वो अहसास होता है जो फ्रेंच फिल्म इन्नोसेंस को देख के हुआ था। वो आभास है कि बच्चों और बड़ो की दुनिया में एक अदृश्य दीवार है, जो बड़े लोग जाने अनजाने खड़ा करते रहते हैं, बच्चों को यथा कथित सामाजिक मूल्यों और मान्यताओ के सांचे में ढालने के लिए, वो एक के बाद एक नियम बनाते जाते हैं।

फिल्म के पहले ही दृश्य में यह बात साँफ हो जाती हैं। जब एक बच्चा क्लास में देरी से आता है तो अध्यापक एक नियम बना देता है, जब एक बच्चा कॉपी पे नहीं पन्ने पे गृह कार्य करके लाता है तो एक और नियम, जब एक बच्चा ( नेमत्ज़देह) अपनी कापी अपने भाई के पास भूल आता है तो फिर एक नियम बन जाता है। ऐसा नहीं कि यह सब नियम बेकार और फिजूल के हैं, पर ये सब देख के ये साँफ हो जाता है कि कौन शासक है, और कौन शाषित। बच्चों के भावहीन अशिक्षित चहरे स्पष्ट बोलते हैं कि चाहे उन्हें कुछ समझ में आये या ना आये पर उन्हें यह सब मानना हैं। नेमात्ज़देह को आगाह किया जाता है कि अगर ये गलती दौबारा हुई तो उसे स्कूल से निकाल दिया जाएगा।

कहानी में मोड़ तब आता है जब नेमत्ज़देह के साथ बैठे अहमद को घर जाके पता चलाता है कि वो भूल से नेमत्ज़देह की कापी अपने साथ घर ले आया है, और फिर शुरू होता है अहमद का अपने दोस्त को उसकी कापी वापस करने का सफर । अहमद अपनी माँ से दोस्त के घर जाने के लिए पूछता है पर जवाब ना में ही आता है। जब अहमद की माँ उसे बाहर कुछ काम के लिए भेजती हैं तो मौका पाकर वो अपने मित्र के घर जाने की सोचता है, परंतु अहमद की परेशानियाँ अभी ख़त्म नहीं होती क्योंकि उसे दोस्त के घर का पता मालूम नहीं है। अहमद कई बार घर का रास्ता पूछने कि कोशिश करता है पर हर जगह उसे धुत्कार दिया जाता है और घुमावदार रास्तों और असंवेदनशील लोगों से भरा, दुसरे गाँव का ये सफर , अहमद के लिए ही नहीं दर्शकों के लिए भी नए माने ले लेता है।

परंपरागत सोच वाले, अहमद के दादा के विचार सुनकर एक प्रकार की चिढ और ग़ुस्सा आता है पर नयी पीढ़ी के बढ़े लोग तो दो कदम आगे ही दिखते हैं जो बच्चों पे बिल्कुल ध्यान नहीं देते, उनकी बच्चों के सवालों के प्रति निरोत्सुक्ता, अपने दायित्व के प्रति उदासीनता का उदाहरण मात्र नहीं , पर उस दीवार का चिन्ह है जो बड़ो को बच्चो की बातें समझने के आड़े आती है। जैसे जैसे रात होती जाती है और दोस्त का घर नहीं मिलता, अहमद को डर लगने लगता है और उसका मन दुविधा और इस अनजान गाँव और लोगों के लिए संशय से भर जाता है। यह नन्हे अहमद की मासूमियत के पतन का आरम्भ सा दीखता है।

फिल्म का सबसे विस्मयकारी और धुंधला प्रसंग वह है जब अहमद दोस्त के घर पहुंच कर भी, उसकी कापी उसे वापिस नहीं करता। मैं अपने एक मित्र से,जिसने ये फिल्म देखी है, बात कर रह था कि अहमद ने ऐसा क्यों किया। हम कुछ नतीजो पर पहुंचे पर कुछ पक्का ना कह पाए। मेरा दोस्त बोला तुम तभी समझ सकते हो अगर तुम बच्चे हो। हाँ, शायद यह ही सही है।

किअरास्तामी की सिनेमा में वास्तविकता और कविता का सरल मिश्रण मिलता हैं। फिल्म के आख़री दृश्य में जब अहमद अपने दोस्त को उसकी कापी देता है, और दोस्त के कापी खोलने पर, वृद्ध व्यक्ति का दिया हुआ फूल सामने उभर के आ जाता है, तो एक अद्भूत अनुभूति होती है। कापी में दबे इस फूल के कई अभिप्राय हो सकते हैं, और शायद यह ही इस दृश्य का सौंदर्य है।

नागार्जुन की तीन कवितायेँ...

जी हाँ , लिख रहा हूँ ...

जी हाँ, लिख रहा हूँ ...
बहुत कुछ ! बहोत बहोत !!
ढ़ेर ढ़ेर सा लिख रहा हूँ !
मगर , आप उसे पढ़ नहीं
पाओगे ... देख नहीं सकोगे
उसे आप !

दर असल बात यह है कि
इन दिनों अपनी लिखावट
आप भी मैं कहॉ पढ़ पाता हूँ
नियोन-राड पर उभरती पंक्तियों की
तरह वो अगले कि क्षण
गुम हो जाती हैं
चेतना के 'की-बोर्ड' पर वो बस
दो-चार सेकेंड तक ही
टिकती है ....
कभी-कभार ही अपनी इस
लिखावट को कागज़ पर
नोट कर पता हूँ
स्पन्दनशील संवेदन की
क्षण-भंगुर लड़ियाँ
सहेजकर उन्हें और तक
पहुंचाना !
बाप रे , कितना मुश्किल है !
आप तो 'फोर-फिगर' मासिक -
वेतन वाले उच्च-अधिकारी ठहरे,
मन-ही-मन तो हसोंगे ही,
की भला यह भी कोई
काम हुआ , की अनाप-
शनाप ख़यालों की
महीन लफ्फाजी ही
करता चले कोई -
यह भी कोई काम हुआ भला !

घिन तो नहीं आती है !

पूरी स्पीड में है ट्राम
खाती है दचके पै दचके
सटता है बदन से बदन-
पसीने से लथपथ ।
छूती है निगाहों को
कत्थई दांतों की मोटी मुस्कान
बेतरतीब मूँछों की थिरकन
सच सच बतलाओ
घिन तो नहीं आती है ?
जी तो नहीं कढता है ?

कुली मजदूर हैं
बोझा ढोते हैं , खींचते हैं ठेला
धूल धुआँ भाफ से पड़ता है साबका
थके मांदे जहाँ तहां हो जाते हैं ढ़ेर
सपने में भी सुनते हैं धरती की धड़कन
आकर ट्राम के अन्दर पिछले डब्बे मैं
बैठ गए हैं इधर उधर तुमसे सट कर
आपस मैं उनकी बतकही
सच सच बतलाओ
जी तो नहीं कढता है ?
घिन तो नहीं आती है ?

दूध सा धुला सादा लिबास है तुम्हारा
निकले हो शायद चौरंगी की हवा खाने
बैठना है पंखे के नीचे , अगले डिब्बे मैं
ये तो बस इसी तरह
लगायेंगे ठहाके, सुरती फाँकेंगे
भरे मुँह बातें करेंगे अपने देस कोस की
सच सच बतलाओ
अखरती तो नहीं इनकी सोहबत ?
जी तो नहीं कढता है ?
घिन तो नहीं आती है ?

कर दो वमन !

प्रभु तुम कर दो वमन !
होगा मेरी क्षुधा का शमन !!

स्वीकृति हो करुणामय,
अजीर्ण अन्न भोजी
अपंगो का नमन !

आते रहे यों ही यम की जम्हायियों के झोंके
होने न पाए हरा यह चमन
प्रभु तुम कर दो वमन !

मार दें भीतर का भाप
उमगती दूबों का आवागमन
बुझ जाए तुम्हारी आंतों की गैस से
हिंद की धरती का मन
प्रभु तुम कर दो वमन !
होगा मेरी क्षुधा का शमन !!

हिंदी में ...

इस चिट्ठे से प्रेरित होकर मैंने सोचा कि क्यों ना अपने कोमा-मय ब्लोग में भी कुछ लिखा जाये। कुछ समय पहले हिंदी के प्रसिद्ध रचनाकार निर्मल वर्मा के निधन पर मैंने ये चिठ्ठा लिखा था । उसी का देवनागरी में रूपान्तर लिख रहा हूँ। थोड़े अभ्यास के बाद शायद ज्यादा लिख सकूं ।

अन्तिम अरण्य

..... कुछ लोग कहते हैं कि वो एक दिन के बाद दूसरे दिन में रहते हैं , उस समय उनका मतलब ये ही होता है कि वो एक ही दिन में रहते हैं। जब मैं छोटा था , तब मैंने अपनी गर्मियों की छुट्टियाँ एक छोटे से कस्बाती स्टेशन में गुजारी थीं । वहां मेरे चाचा स्टेशन मास्टर थें। मैं देखा करता था कि रेल के डिब्बे जो पुराने हो जाते थे , उन्हें एक छोटी लाईन पर खड़ा कर दिया जाता था , रेल गाड़ियाँ आती और उन्हें छोड़ कर धड़धड़ाती हुई आगे बढ़ जाती । उन खाली डिब्बों में हम लुका-छुप्पी का खेल खेलते थे । कभी कभी हमे वहां अनोखी चीजें मिल जाती । किसी आदमी का मफलर , सीट के नीचे दुबका किसी लड़की का सेंडल , एक बार तो मुझे एक मुसाफ़िर कि फटी पुरानी नोटबुक भी मिली थी , जिस में पांच रूपये का चीकट नोट दबा था , पर सबसे विस्मयकारी स्मृति स्वम उस रेल के डिब्बे कि थी जो रेल कि पटरी पर खड़ा हुआ भी कहीँ नहीं जाता था ।

Why I Lie : How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love to Lie

I know, it is not even an original title for a post, but these are not the things one should lie about. Lying, as you will come to know in few flimsy paragraphs, is a true art form, and allows use of all the humanly possible senses and raises wide spectrum of philosophical questions involving morality (hi-brow), love (middle-brow) and friendship (low-brow), not to any depth though.

I should make this clear, before we go any further that the act of lying, which we will be discussing here, is not an act of making fraudulent lies, lying about facts, lying to back stab etc, all those big Shakespearean lies are excluded here, with due respect. The lies in question are humble, harmless, non-abrasive and innocent(?). Its a thin line, but to proceed any further, you should know the basic difference. For example, to lie to your smoke-buddy because you don't want him to accompany you to the smoking area. There can be two hidden reasons, one is - you have two cigarettes and you want to smoke both, second is you want to smoke alone today. The second one is perfectly justified, but not the first one. One more example, you don't want to discuss a new film with a friend to avoid any unnecessary tension, one reason might be that you know that s/he has very different taste, the second reason might be that you feel s/he has no taste at all. To me, both the reasons are justified. The thicker the friendship, the more they are justified, and in case of love interests, it immoral and even illegal not to lie.

I generally consider myself a truthful person, but I know I have lied more than anybody else I know, with more perfection and in the things that matter. If someone asks me, have you seen/read 'Da Vinci Code', I have developed a unique power to say yes with a blank dummy face and a confident half-smile that doesn't convey a thing but it has the capacity to stop any more discussion on 'Da Vinci Code' not only then but in future too. The complex facial expression is a victorious mixture of I-am-not-scared-a-bit, of-course-we-can-discuss, we-know-we-will-agree, I-know-what-you-know and whats-the-use-then/life-is-beautiful. The whole point is to miss the point of 'Da Vinci Code', the point that the other person wants to discuss for few more minutes. Art of lying helps us leap in time and space, it can be applied to evade, elude, to escape and jump over fences, to minimize unpleasant social times and spaces. It helps in mandatory socializing even if you have an anti-social bent of mind. Prompt lies aid to quickly 'snail in' with smile, the only refuge of confused modern man.

I vividly remember, in the late night bout of guilt reduction and being candid, I admitted to a good friend of mine about my lying powers and my liberal views about it. He felt extremely betrayed and instantaneously lost faith in me, and asked me, have I ever read 'Rich Dad, Poor Dad'. It was a horrible moment with such distrust in the room. I still lament that night. Its like even little hope has deserted me. I have heard people saying that lying is a only hope for a married man. That night, I realized that even for a lonely bachelor, its quite a thing. Also, that night I learned not to confess such things to anyone. They will not understand. Mixing two moralities always result in guilt and useless justifications.

After that night, the seed of guilt was set in my conscience. He accused me of snobbery and arrogance, which due to the condition I was in, I duly accepted. Every time my phone rang and I spoke of being busy in a meeting, my heart quivered and the clear soul of my late-night ex-friend hovered up in perfect circles. I almost lost my innocence. In an honest effort not to lie, I became silent. When you don't speak, your mind works faster and its good enough to kill a person of lower intellect like me. Those days, when asked about 'The Fountainhead', I used to wish desperately I could lie with blank face that I have read it, that could close the discussion without fuss. But not... 'Ayn Rand' yells aloud "Money is the barometer of a society's virtue" What pain and agony !

It took me months to recover from it. The breakthrough came when I decided not to lie, pick all the calls and discuss things to death. I realized that to be a truthful person in the worldly sense, one should not lie plainly but try to give reasons and argue i.e. simply talk and eventually turn more bitter. But the problem faced by people of limited intellect is quite a dilemma. They have to eventually lie. Its also less hurtful to both the parties. Also, more interestingly, lies spoken in the beginning are more terse and simple, than the meandering, complex lie that are spoken in the end, out of frustration and urgent need of self-vindication. So I understood the wisdom of one more cliché, the sooner, the better.

So, the question remains, why I lie, other than the shut-yourself-up to shut-the-world-out explanation. I know I discuss mundane things for hours but resort to lying if someone discuss their kids or car with unwarranted seriousness. I think, lying titillates. I lie because I have a thinking inertia. I don't want to think for things, I don't care, except in satirical terms. Also, lying gives rest to the lobes, especially to the frontal one, and a little quality recreation to senses too. It gives a carefree, childish pleasure which is unknown to the over-rational, civilized world. Lying gives a dual delight of a little job accomplished and a little time salvaged. Even for things I like, I hate juvenile enthusiasm (I myself show it often though). I hate if someone says 'Kurosawa-saan is sooo great'. Inattentive, inexperienced, popular fan-boyish truths are any day more dangerous than lies. I think, everyone should pass a 'Fat Girl' or 'Weekend' or 'Naked Lunch' or 'Hour of the Wolf' test first, before saying so. My better self is extremely snobbish about truths. When there are so less well-meant, non-hurting truths, one has to fall back on harmless lies to live in peace.

The Openings and The Endings.

The Openings

1. Woyzeck : Nabokov said in his essay on Metamorphosis that 'beauty plus pity' is the closest we can get to a definition of art. If it is so then this is the example. Also its my favorite Herzog film, although I haven't seen many.



2. The Player : And they talk about long shots and "great" Hollywood stories.

3. Persona : This opening sequence alarms you that it is not a easy road ahead.




The Endings (Spoilers Ahead)

1. Nights of Cabiria. I think, the most humane and heart breaking theme of art is 'misfits having desires', and how they are brutally crushed by the fitter tribe. Fellini adds another dimension.



2. Blue : Is this what they mean when they say "pull all the strings together" !





3. Sunset Blvd : Another misfit having desire. Beauty plus pity !

How to watch a film !

These instructions are based on shallow (and unmarried) personal experience and not to be taken seriously. These particulars should not be generalized, identified with or anyway followed, except in some formal experimental tests, all these experiments may not be dangerous in a literal way but if taken with (or without) thought can be permanently damaging. Dont care about this self important disclaimer or the similar post that follows, it is for me.

There is a definitive art of film watching, which is different from movie watching. Movie watching is an impersonal affair (watch with friends and pop the corns, no bother). A Fight Club comes as a movie watching exercise, but a Tokyo Story is essentially film watching experience (watch alone, no bother). If you are watching a film, you need to feel completely, utterly free. Free to pause and play, to dance and think, in between the film. To achieve this freedom, some ground work needs to be done. To start with, switch off your mobile phone, for the weak-hearted, we recommend to put them in silent mode at first, and then move to complete switch off mode (It a social exercise also, which will make you realize, that there are no calls that you can't miss, or in some cases it reveals something more basic, nobody calls you). If anyone calls and you accidentally pick the phone, say you are in a meeting, people understand this reason more than anything else, and will give you Chichikovian respect too.

Once you have your mobile switched off, take (or take out) some of things that you feel distract you. Eat and piss, or take a smoke. Take pen-paper if you want to take notes. Never bother that you have to watch the full film in one go, assume you are free to push pause, assume you are free to think astray (forced concentration is obviously not the key here), assume that you are free to not understand anything, assume that electricity wont go off, and a friend wont knock your door. Be comfortable, don't care, shut the world off, in short, - I know how much I hate to say this - be bourgeois (although we all already are).

Always choose the films like a daily routine. Also, don't be afraid to see a bad film, they are much more educative. If I have Mouchette, Late Spring and Naked for a holiday, I would like to see Mouchette in morning after light breakfast, Late Spring will go after lunch, lying on the bed with few hankies handy and Naked with go with evening smoke. Any meeting with friends in between will spoil the experience, go alone to eat or better order at home or even better skip meals (take a heavy dinner to shut up the hunger, and sleep). One can fill up the time between films by reading about the films in general (not those specific films) or see bollywood songs on youtube or Zee Classic (alienation effect). One can dance also, since there is no physical exercise for the whole day. Although it doesn't look like, the idea is to have a healthy diet !

Now start the film. Don't think that you have to see the film or the special features first. Complete anything interesting/inviting/distracting and then move to the film. And in case you have some "scenes" to look in that film, look at them first, don't let them deflect you, vent them off in the beginning like Godard did in Contempt with Bardot, and more importantly don't feel guilty about such pleasures, because now your "soul" is clean. Once you are fine to proceed, switch off the lights, and restart it.

A good viewer must betray himself. He must go against his sex, sexual desires, his taste, prejudices and denounce any prejudgements. This is a way to expand and appreciate and understand more, and at times to get the subtlest of ideas. Most of the times deviance fine-tunes the existing self, makes it more tolerant and free. A Bad Education demands to appreciate and understand Gael García Bernal in all the three avatars. A Teorema calls for even more. One should be like the assaulted white actors of 'Be Black' campaign from Brian DePalma's marvelously Godardian Hi, Mom! , who say "It was a good exercise, Now we know how is it to be Black" (Although in the film, it is loaded with irony). Some may call it masochistic, but don't care much for yourself, you will survive.

Although it depends on the film, in general, watch the film for first 35 mins with total devotion and no questions (just receive the images, eat with eyes). The point is to shut the brains, delay any questions as of now. Give it some time to dress up/dress down. Give the director time and space to clean or fill your mind. And this is one reason I don't watch films with friends who invariably become uneasy when they have invested 30 mins of their ohh-so-precious time in the film, and start demanding what not. Not that a good film will give you a peak around 35 mins, but it is like the gestation period. The film might or might not work after that, but these 35 minutes of pure devotion are absolutely essential. This devotion should ideally be given to members of all class and caste, no snobbery is entertained before the flickering screen.

After you have given some time to the film, it starts to reveal itself. The experience of the movie can be equated to taste or tone of music or color. A good film pays off in humble quanta. The pay off can be like the long conversation between the country priest and countess in Diary of Country Priest, or a devastating look on the face of Vera in Vera Drake. It may be the flash of brilliance in the Brechtian end sequence of Body Double. It can be the pleasure to just watch Cabiria through her journey. The returns from a film are not calculative, they are more of intuitive. When we see one scene for the first time, our first response is based on our intuition, a little later follows the judging part, and much later the deconstruction part (thematically/ideologiocally, technically (sound, camera, action) and inference-wise), which is then re-constructed into a complex response. If the intuitive part and the last complex response are almost same, we feel the honesty of the image that we saw, we feel that we are not manipulated. Otherwise, pretension comes forth. In my self-made, self-satisfying, simplistic theory, I feel that a director starts similarly, he imagines a scene based on intuition, then deconstructs and constructs to check its integrity. The problem with this approach is that most of the times deconstruction is not always honest/correct on a viewer's part, and he ends up getting something that director never meant. This is the peril of interpretation. Is any work of art, signifies how/what we construct(or deconstruct or analyze) it, or what was its original meaning or intent, I am not sure of. But there is a level of interpretation, and cross references, and a viewer should know what and how to construe, for his own benefit, otherwise these interpretation can be merely self serving delusions. In all this, we should accept the crime and responsibility of flattening out the images to map our brain patterns as much as we accept that we are free to do that.

The first impression may not be the most thoughtful one, but the most honest one, and usually tell you something about yourself. Also, we must know that there is difference between - to appreciate a work and to love it. Don't be scared to love, even if you know you can not appreciate it or it is not appreciated by those whose opinion you deeply regard. It is one of the many pleasures of film watching. Also, try to appreciate whatever you can, as cinema is a mixed art. Don't ignore the visual design of a film that doesn't work thematically. Sometimes I feel bothered by the overuse of uncinematic tools like narration (like in Sans Soleil, a great and insightful film though but at times the otherwise evocative narration is too guiding) or the overdose of cinematic tools (like in Theo Angelopoulos' The Weeping Meadow, a potential good film but we can equate its staged, precise and self important imagery to something like fatally smug poetry). At times, I wonder why so much importance is given to the philosophical and moral implications of a film than to its visual language (visual language can in itself be manipulative thematically), much like the discrimination between cerebral and carnal desires, as if they are entirely different.

Once the film finishes, don't rush to get the conclusion and try to find what it meant (I do so shamelessly). Admit if you did not understand it. Big critics have done that. It might hit you one odd night, rest assured a good film, like a ghost, doesn't leave you that easily. As you sleep, and close the day, think about the scene that you liked, and close your eyes.

One of the properties of good film is that its not easily recommendable to everyone. One end up using disclaimers like "You may not like it", "It may be shocking", "There is no plot, if you are looking for one" etc etc. A good film can be colorless, odorless and inert for an inattentive soul. A good film should have spirit to miss the tempting opportunities and heart to hear and see (or rather show) the quotidian. A good film is willing to take risks, walk off the line like Fat Girl does. It can be accused of being a big bore, with either no end result (Chungking Express) or with a shocking ending (Audition) or being too outlandish to stomach (Naked Lunch / Crash), but it tells/reminds you something about you, or the world you live in and beyond or about its own form and flesh.

All said and done one must remember what Tarkovsky said:

It is obvious that art cannot teach anyone anything, since in four thousand years humanity has learnt nothing at all. We should long ago have become angels had we been capable of paying attention to the experience of art, and allowing ourselves to be changed in accordance with the ideals it expresses. Art only has the capacity, through shock and catharsis, to make the human soul receptive to good. It's ridiculous to imagine that people can be taught to be good...Art can only give food - a jolt - the occasion - for psychical experience.

On Marriage

From The Importance of Being Earnest

Jack: How utterly unromantic you are!

Algernon: I really don't see anything romantic in proposing. Its very romantic to be in love. But there is nothing romantic about a definite proposal. Why, one might be accepted. One usually is, I believe. Then the excitement is all over. The very essence of romance is uncertainty. If ever I get married, I'll certainly try to forget the fact.


From Dead Souls

Happy is the traveler, who after a long and wearisome journey with its cold and slush and mud, sleepy station masters, jingling bells, repairs, altercations, drivers, blacksmith, and all sorts of villains of the road, at last beholds the familiar roof, and the lights rushing to met him, and then the familiar rooms appear before him, he hears the joyful cries of the servants running out to meet him, the noise and the pattering footsteps of the children, and soothing, gentle words interspersed with passionate kisses that have the power to blot out all the sad thoughts from his memory. Happy the family who has a home of his own, but woe to a bachelor !

From Annie Hall

[Alvy addresses a pair of strangers on the street]
Alvy Singer: Here, you look like a very happy couple, um, are you?
Female street stranger: Yeah.
Alvy Singer: Yeah? So, so, how do you account for it?
Female street stranger: Uh, I'm very shallow and empty and I have no ideas
and nothing interesting to say.
Male street stranger: And I'm exactly the same way.
Alvy Singer: I see. Wow. That's very interesting. So you've managed to work
out something?

Films this Weekend.

I caught a mild fever midway this long weekend and utilized some of it to see films. Here is the list in chronological order.

Guru: Nothing much to appreciate, except Vidya Balan's death, it is the only high point of the film, sort of pulled loose strings together for a while. Also, Mithun Chakraborty is very good and his sincere contempt for God is only instance I saw in recent Hindi films, where a character shows it - without any guilt, doesn't succumb till end, and is not punished for it.

Salaam-e-Ishq : Nothing to talk about, except that its almost four hours long. I liked the last song sung by Kailash Kher. Its goes "Ya rabba, dede koi jaan bhi agar, dilbar pe ho na koi asar", at last they understood.

Innocence: I liked it but I have one problem with it, its ending. [Spoiler Ahead]. There can be two major interpretations of the ending. After the purple-girls are 'released' from the school, one of them, Bianca (Bérangère Haubruge), go and play under a fountain with a young boy, giggling and splashing water on the boy, and scene closes as the film has started, with fluids and bubble. One simple reading is that she is now liberated and freely exploring her sexuality, which she has meticulously endured, saved and cultivated. The second reading might be dark, her release from school may her descent/trapping into much real and horribly concealed world, earlier she was doing one stage show (which is film's metaphor for prostitution), now its a daily ritual, she is now everybody's whore, free but in fierce competition, and constantly and unconsciously catering to the sexual drive of the world. This revelation will be her true loss of innocence. If the film meant the first one, I looks a bit cliched, even if it is an amazing visual treat filled with horror in every corner (even a simple act of young girl playing on a swing creates sense of horror and fear of unknown), acted by an absolutely brilliant cast, especially the girl who plays Iris (Zoé Auclair). If it is of the second kind, it makes lot of sense. But I feel, its a mixture of the two.

L'Atalante : What can I say. Although this film is set on a ship with newly-wed couple, it seems that Jean Vigo has made a character out of Paris, not just a city alluring and cheating at the same time, but an enticing red lipped whore, a far-off love interest. The farewell scene of Juliette (Dita Parlo) is comic but a single look on her mother's face changes it to tragic. The look at the face of the thief is so feeble that we feel more bad for him than for the Juliette, whose purse he stole. Amazing montage of the rage of crowd and cruelty of a big city. The erotic love scene where distant lovers make love, or the underwater sequence (such sequence in 1934, amazing !) where Jean (Jean Dasté) searches for Juliette or the scene where Juliette walks on ship's deck with foggy background. Idiotic Jules (Michel Simon), who involuntary seduces Juliette and the peddler who charms her and the city where she is lost. This is one of those few films where the re-union of the lead pair is both real and also has dusky dream-like quality.

Suzhou River: Good film. Its like Vertigo, set in modern China and the direction is inspired by Wong Kar-wai. The leads are very good especially the actor who plays Mardar (Jia Hongshen). There is one scene where he is drunk and he acts amazingly downbeat. The film looks too adamant to see allegory in the obsessive tale of love, that I think is its weakness.

Zatiachi: The beginning of the film is very cinematic, the way few characters are introduced side by side their past and their skills. The music and fights are very fresh. The sword fights are short and bloody in an alienating and shocking way. A good tap dance finale. A novel Zatiachi.

Ghost World : Good Film. Thora Birch is extremely good as Enid, who hates extroverted, obnoxious, pseudo-bohemian losers. Its heart breaking to see how all those whom Enid thought will never move, move ahead of her. Great dialogues. In one Seymour (played by Steve Buscemi) says "Maybe I don't want to meet someone who shares my interests. I hate my interests." Wow, someone finally said that ! Also Seymour says " I suppose things are better now, but... I don't know. People still hate each other, they just know how to hide it better."

Frozen : They say its about artistic freedom but it is primarily about artistic void. It is said to be based on real events, about the artist, Qi Lei, who is obsessed with death and tries to stage his death through ice burial. With a twist at the end, film mixes art, life, death and 'will to die' nicely. Lead actor ( Xiaoqing Ma) is very good, he says so much without dialogues, he also played the lead in Suzhou River. Not very good, but a nice small film about an artist in trouble.

Gerry: Saw first 45 mins and slept. Its moving to nowhere, and I am liking it.

Will write about some of them in detail later. I am preparing a list of films and film-makers from East Asia and South East Asia, that I need to see. Will share it, once its done.

Omkara and Expletives

Disclaimer: Please don't read if you easily get offended.

There was a huge debate over the use of expletives in Omkara. Though very late, but here is my take on it. Just to clarify, I am from the land where the film is supposedly set and I am a big fan of all those expletives, this post is an effort to do justice to what they deserve.

Before we proceed let me have a code of referring to them. They are not meant to be written (especially not in English transliteration) so we are not going to write any one of them here. We are going to refer them by the first English letter in their transliteration. Also, most of the impact of the examples I quote will be lost, because they are written, not spoken. Call me prude but here we go.

To say the least, I hated the use of expletives in Omkara and the way the whole debate was hijacked by was it a right decision to use them or not. No one ever even bothered about how to use them, which was the whole point. Expletives are never used as exclamation marks. There are two reasons for that. Firstly, they become too obvious (which is bad for their ample use), secondly, exclamatory use make them a statement of sort, which they are not. If I say, "kinghe jaa raa, B" (where are you going, B), it doesn't make any sense. No one sensible will use them like this. The correct use is "abe kinghe jaa raa, B sunta hi na" (where are you going, B doesn't listen to me). It makes perfect sense. Here B doesn't qualify the person but his act of not listening. Note that there is a slight tinge of care for the person you use them for.

Let me make an parallel for the use of expletives. We have a sweet-dish up north, its called gur-gajar. In a small setup (its called a Kohlu) where gur (jaggery) is made, when gur is in the last stage of its making, we put some skinned carrots (cut them across the length such that they don't slice into two, like we do in green chilly pickle) into steamy hot gur, stir them for about 5 mins or so till they become soft and juicy, and then taken them out. After half an hour (just to cool down a bit, but still too hot to handle), they are picked out whole and put in mouths (this usually causes mouth ulcers for children, but who cares). Now there is no single entity, - no gur, no carrot, they are joined into holy matrimony of sweet love. As the carrot enters the mouth with juice dipping from chin to chest, it is an experience and sight to behold. Expletives are like carrots, and the language like gur to begin with. It is not to say that language sweetens the effect of expletives, but it is to say that it assimilates it, they are joined seamlessly. Any attempt to separate them is done in bad taste and stinks of vulgar sensationalism.

Experienced and well meaning people mostly use expletives in between the sentence and never raise their voice while speaking them. They go with the flow of the sentence, adding a more lyrical quality and liveliness (immediacy). There is no show off, they are lukewarm honey dropped from heaven in between the sentences, adding the warmth. No one notices them in the sentence, but every one know they are spoken. For Gods sake, please don't use them like the F word. First thing to note is they are not meant for abuse. They are not just fillers. They are the flavor. They should seep in effortlessly and slowly over time, like flavor in hot-soft muffins, not like an add-on of hard nuts. Its a lazy way to use them. If one watches closely, he/she will notice that most of the expletives are used for inanimate things, situations and life as such, not for people. Simple use of expletive comes with inanimate but personal things, which we love, for eg. scooters, "yaar, B, start ho jaa, G lega kya".

In Omkara, barring few occasions by Deepak Dobriyal, no one used them properly. It was one of the biggest reason why I didn't like the film much. You can call be names, but I get really sentimental about expletives. I see them as a part of culture. At last, after all this talking, I should give you an example of the correct use of expletives. In Khosla ka Ghosla, when Khoslaji (Anupam Kher) tells his friend, Sahni sa'ab (Vinod Nagpal) that his son doesn't like his name, he replies "Khosla saab.. aaj kal ke bachche bade mnc mijaaz ke hote hain...unhe ye kabootron waale naamon mein sharmindgi mehsoos hoti hai ...nayi ?.. unke saath ek baar compromise kar lo, saare budhape ki insurance ho jaati hai...ooo jee.. sach poocho to ye saara desh hi B compromise pe chal raha hai.. hai ji...". The honey dropped from heaven and it was a moment of pure bliss.

NB: This post would not be possible without the help of Vivek and Rajeev. Thanks !