Macchars don’t wear sweaters

I have my arguments all ready,

And very logical too,

But who shall argue with indifference,

My phone rang, the display told me it was a call from a doctor acquaintance, whom I knew..hmm…a little. We had spoken a couple of times, even decided to get together for drinks sometime, but I had always taken that to be a pleasantry rather than there being any serious intent behind it. “What are you doing today evening” he asked me. He wants to go for drinks – I speculated, and being rather bored, it felt like a good proposition. “Nothing” I said. “Will you go on a Business meeting with me” he asked.

Oh no! Not another one! – was my instant reaction. This was not the first time I had been approached or been invited for a “Business meeting”. The expression was commonly used by the multi level marketing brigade to try and rope in new recruits. And this not the first time I had been approached by a Businessmeetinger by a far cry. In-spite of my abhorrence of the concept and the people who touted it, I somehow attracted them like flies to a light. Perhaps there is something about my face which screams “I am gullible”, or “waiting to be brain washed”.

But he is a doctor! professional, educated, enlightened, responsible, sensible – I wondered. How did he end up in all this! And I couldn’t help asking him as much. “I know people have preconceived notions about this” he said. “but its not what you think it is” “why don’t you come over and find out for yourself” he continued in an imminently rational and reasonable tone. Logical argument one would have thought, if I hadn’t heard it for the millionth time from every salesman selling his wares. And he instantly plummeted a thousand meters in my approbation.

But having touched the depths of boredom as I had, it actually felt like a reasonable way to spend my evening, if only for a few laughs. “I will come” I told him, “but only because were friends” “im never going to join up”. “we shall talk about it after the meeting is through” he said cheerfully. “But come with an open mind”, he concluded.

.

A feeling sweeps over me on rare occaisons. A feeling of contentment with myself, or of “im ok”. It is not really an arrogant feeling. Its more a strong if passing beleif that I really have some worth. A feeling of being appreciated for what i really am (or the way id like to see myself). Or a sense of gladness that I am able to appreciate what is tasteful. And that there are creators who see “tasteful” as i do. This usually comes after absorbing a piece of genuinely funny humor, a meaningful debate, a touching movie, or perhaps on the play-field. I barely get this feeling from human interaction, except perhaps when I’m chatting with my close circle.

And when this feeling hits me, i experience a strange self sufficiency. That I could possibly spend the rest of my days on my own, and joyfully, without really any need for human reciproaction. And even in human relations, i feel that i may genuinely have some value, some happiness to offer.

I wish i could stretch this feeling to last longer.

Having recently come across a blogger who writes about movies with such depth and sensitivity that it’s almost staggering, I have been inspired to take up the business of movie reviews again.

The movie for the purpose of the current post is Clint Eastwood’s Million Dollar Baby. I never really was much inclined to see the movie, because of my general negative assessment of “boxing” movies. They remind me of movies like “Rocky” or its Hindi counterpart “Boxer” (Mithun) which trace the fortunes of a star boxer, who ultimately rises and triumphs after being knocked down a couple of hundred times. It is for this reason that I passed over even a classic like “Raging Bull”.

But when I was finished with MDB, I experienced an emotion that I’ve never felt for a movie. It was the feeling of emotions being piled up and rising to a pitch, but never being released. There never was a moment of catharsis, the sweeping release we feel when the lid is finally raised and the steam rushes out. And it is in this that it seems to me that the movie comes close to the currents of life, which are purely incidental, driven only by chance. It is for humans, with their awareness of existence and capacity to feel pain, to try and find meaning, where there is none inherently.

It is the story of two lives, empty and alienated, which find brief meaning in each other, till life again meanders on its meaningless path. A brief flicker in darkness, before darkness takes over again. The movie is narrated in the voice of Morgan Freeman, who tells its story with the detachment of an observer, but an observer who understands the tragedy of the characters, and harbors profound sympathy for their fate.

Clint Eastwood is Frankie, an old boxing coach, a somber character leading a lonely life, spending most of his time alone in his office reading books. All his attempts to reestablish a connection with his estranged daughter are met with failure as she refuses to have anything to do with him. The monotony of his life is broken when a 31 year old nondescript waitress, Hillary Swank, as Maggie, knocks at his doors to take her under his wing and train her to be a boxer. Hillary comes from a dysfunctional family, has a cold mother and has always led a life of obscurity. Boxing for her is her chance to come out of life where she means nothing and to find meaning and purpose.

Initially dismissive and non-interested, Frankie gives in to her perseverance and passion and decides to coach her. The movie traces her rise as a boxer and the relationship that gradually develops between Frankie and Maggie. It is certainly not romance, and maybe more akin to that of a father-daughter. But it is not even quite that. It is more the connection formed between two forlorn souls, who have finally found a hand to hold on to, found gladness and purpose in a life which was otherwise hurling towards nowhere. Maggie slowly rises to fame and reaches the very top as a boxer. Life finally seems to be heading towards being what it was meant to be. But life has other plans.

It is not in tracing her fortunes as a boxer does the movie become great. The unexpected turn the story takes in the last quarter is what makes it especially touching. An accident in the ring paralyses Maggie completely, and most likely that is how she will have to spend the rest of her life. Life which soared to the heights briefly, again tumbles down to the depths. Unable to see the suffering of the one whom he has grown to love so deeply, Frankie suffers through an intense moral dilemma, till he finally decides to pull the plug, and relieve Maggie of her pain. The action is not an endorsement of euthanasia by the director. It is merely the action of someone who takes a decision in his particular circumstances. Of being torn between being unable to see the suffering of someone you love so much, and yet unable to let go of them.

And to conclude the tale, after pulling the plug on Maggie, Frankie vanishes into the dark night, who knows where, to what town, to do what. We, with the narrator, are left to stare at the emptiness of the rooms where a human tale so touching played itself out, before disappearing forever, leaving the rooms as empty as before.

A poignancy pierces the depths of your heart. Makes you want to look up and scream at the cosmic nothingness.

One would think Indians don’t really have a sense of humor. All comic movies conclude chaotically with all characters coming together in the climax, running amok, doing facial gymnastics, Rajpal Yadav prancing about, talking in excitable tones, with “comic music” for added effect (like toinnnnnnnn, teuuuuuun, tuiiiiiiiiiiiii) etc etc. In short, an epitome of slapstick-ness. I don’t know whether to blame “jaane bhi do yaaron” for it, but it has certainly defined the parameters for Indian comedy and every movie must end on a note of orgasmic slapstickness. Even apart from that, the movie’s sense of the “funny” comprises of archana puran singh making obtuse sexual allusions (of the “kya legi” “mai dun kya” genre) or a poo laden diaper flying through the air in slow motion heading towards someone’s face.

Well, notwithstanding the above mentioned primary school brand of humor, desi humor for me is sometimes can be gut wrenchingly humorous, funnier than anything i’ve ever come across. It is somehow the funniest at its most rustic. The following are my collection of the sublimely funny!

http://ishare.rediff.com/filemusic-Chalojhumri%20Talaiya-id-10027459.php

http://ishare.rediff.com/filemusic-Chalojhumri%20Talaiya%20%7BPart-2%7D-id-10029057.php

(bless sudesh bhosle. i discovered the above two after 16 years. and they’re still as amusing at they were then!)

(who says pakis are all about long beards and ak47s. you need to know Punjabi to really appreciate the above. if u dont..i pity you!! )

Theres no doubt in my mind that a majority of contemperory movies are “image” movies. These movies target a youthful urban India and depict certain “images” through which urban India would like to see itself (the overall feel of these movies is of an ICICI ad). Apart from these images, the movies are devoid of any content or thought, or even entretainment value for me. A majority of current movies fall under this category, and movies which audiences have especially connected with are “dil chahta hai” (what an apt title, doesnt it translate to “wannabe”), and Rang De Basanti. These movies depict a certain youthfulness which is characterized by facial contortions, puppy faces, wide eyes and excitable mock tones. There is an almost plastic freshness. And there is a discovery and gradual experimentation with sexuality. Some movies touch upon the dark side of this “stylish urban modernity” like “Life in a Metro”. This movie may have been a copy of “the apartment”, but the underlying discource seemed to me to be an almost proud touting of its new found sexuality.

Perhaps these movies are a reflection of ubran india itself, which is going through a metamorphosis of identity, being subject to pressures from both the Western culture as well as the native Indian culture. A reconciliation of traditional values and western “modernity”. But what has been gleaned from “western modernity” is its most surface elements, the glitz and glamour, as depicted by the media and Hollywood, rather than its deeper currents/soul which emphasize individuality, rationality, and accomodation of the deviant/non conformist.

Disclaimer – It is likely that my views come from the fact that my small town sensibilities are jolted. What is natural to someone in urban india may seem to me to be “pretentious”.

laughter is the key to your heart.

What a joy it would be to be in harmony. To be secure in oneself, to be expectation-less. To simply be an observer of the world’s beauty. The world has much beauty worthy of admiration. Even more pain perhaps, but much of it comes from inner doubt. The pain makes it even more important that what joys exist be grabbed with both hands. So how good it would be to see the world with a child’s wonder. Even enjoy intellectual pleasures with a child’s joy. Cast away all the bitterness, all the bad memories. Walk down the street, and watch the trees wave in the wind, birds fly from perch to perch, people laugh together, white clouds form in merry patterns far off in the blue sky, the divinity of a beautiful girl, little pups playing near the kerb, two gaily chatting lovers in a rickshaw relishing the proximity, brick houses in all shapes and colours. Look upon all new relationships as an enriching adventure, exploring a new human with all their peculiarities and richness, without judging or being afraid of being judged. To absorb the magnificent subtlety of a great movie, a strain of music, or a painting. Or be tickled by the not so great art. To wonder at the heights human thought has achieved in a philosophy, a literary work, a political or scientific writing. To be in awe of the mysterious universe. To be in a perpetual state of wonderment even when alone, never bored, never lonely.

Seems like a distant dream now. But who knows!

The mention of the word “spirituality” has long evoked a deep skepticism in me, if I haven’t out rightly scoffed at it. It has always rung empty and devoid of meaning. It seems to be of the fare of pseudo-philosophy which one sees so often touted in greeting cards, wall posters, forwarded emails and many a condescending lip. Sweet sounding word play that wouldn’t hold up to closer examination for a minute. How many times does one hear “phal ki iccha mat karo, karam karo”, “attachment leads to all suffering”, “sab kuch acche ke liye hota hai”, or “sabke andar bhagwan hai”. Does all this come from a close examination of life, or is merely an unconsidered regurgitation of phrases that one touts to have pretensions on depth, and to prove that one is not steeped completely in the mundane and the “materialistic”. Ha, the condensation with which everybody decries “materialism”. Even if these phrases do contain some deep meaning, they barely scratch the surface those who love to utter them. At most it is a very surface kind of feel goodism. A couple of books by Deepak Chopra, a couple of sermons on Bhatkti TV, pooja once a day and we’ve earned our certificate of spirituality. Rational enquiry is certainly an alien concept to most, as most people wouldn’t rather bother with the axiomatic assumptions that have been handed down to them. And I don’t think I’ve really been too unfair on the word in its commonly used sense.

“Philosophy” and “spirituality” have long stood in stark contrast in my mind. Philosophy doesn’t believe in the grand old man on the other side of the moon, just because daddy said so. It uses the only guiding light know to us that is dependable – that of reason. Of following the rules of logic, incorporating observable or experienced facts, trying to establish cause effect relationships etc etc. (wiki entry for the “method of reason”) 

And Philosophy’s intentions are no less than grand. It takes upon itself to unravel the true nature of things, and to unravel the workings of the universe. Nothing is taken at face value, everything is sought to be dissected further and further, till it accounts for itself on the pulpit of reason. Reason itself is not spared from its own glare, as philosophy seeks to understand how we understand, and the meaning of understanding itself. Conventional beliefs are also given their due, considering how deeply embedded they are in the human race. But as successive layers are unraveled, far from a clear picture being revealed, a picture mired more and more in obscurity emerges, and seems ever farther from being captured by the human mind. But even in this process, profound new insights are gained, which might be seen as humankinds true achievements. The mind boggling complexity of existence is acknowledged, rather than the magnificent impertinence of dogma, which erects its edifice based on invisible beings in the sky, and invokes the fear of cosmic authority may you dare to question it. Dogmatic systems are neat and well rounded systems, reinforced and plugged by rewards and our inherent fear of the unknown, which don’t seem to have anything in common with observable and experienced reality. Doubt is strangled and the very first step of inquiry is cut short with the concept of “slander” and phrases like “you cannot understand His nature”.

But in recent times, my view of “spirituality” has begun to change, perhaps due to personal life events and the influences I’ve been exposed to lately. Philosophy sometimes has the air of being a little too cold and objective. In its attempt to unravel the larger picture, it somehow tends to ignore to center of each existence, the Self. What everybody is seeking is perhaps not an intellectual understanding of the world but to strike an “inner balance” – a feeling of wholesomeness and inner well being. Of having arrived at a deeper truth that offers some stability in a turbulent life, some permanence in the midst of transient and volatile circumstances, and especially the inner volatility these circumstances lead to – despair, euphoria, lackadaisicalness, excitability, sorrow, boredom, pain, envy, intense yearning, anger, rage, calmness, shame, restlessness, cheer, etc etc etc. A subjective truth that we feel deeply with our being, rather than an external truth like the physical workings of the universe. Someone perhaps very rightly said “whether the sun revolves around the earth or vice versa is a matter of profound indifference to me”. At the same time these two truths are not so easily segregated, because our view of the external world forms part of our life philosophy, which is intimate to us.

Spirituality is not strictly scientific or rational, because it isn’t really interested in the working of the “objective world”. It is more interested in the inner world, humans as subjective emotional beings. In fact, the spirituality’s quest operates entirely within the subjectivity of the individual. The mind/spirit/soul/self is considered to have fundamental importance in the universe, as do human emotions, intentions and drives, and it is assumed that the structure of the universe allows for personal meaning. The possible biological, genetic aspect of the mind is ignored. It however does allow for “instinctive” forces which are seen as drives which emerge from the needs of the body.

The quest that is spirituality operates entirely within the subjectivity of the individual. An attempt is made to observe oneself, ones inner workings and emotional states, how these states arise, with a view to understand ones mind, its prejudices, its patterns. And the spiritual quest is anything but easy. It involves great mental risks. Oftentimes people give up everything of what we call “a normal life” to live lives of seclusion, renunciation, penance or even self torture in an attempt to find a deeper truth. The very act of casting off ones mental anchors and deeply and genuinely probing ones mind requires great courage. To question what we take as axiomatic – human relations, our conception of right & wrong, family, our nobility, ones life path (education, marriage, children, career), our life objectives. To push away a view of life which has been served on a platter. It takes strength to acknowledge ones true motives behind the sheen of nobility in which we like to see ourselves. Who knows, perhaps not everybody has that kind of mental fortitude and might fall into insanity.    

These undertakings seem to yield effects, what is called “altered consciousness”, a feeling of having acquired some greater knowledge, or harmony with ones surroundings and the rhythms of the universe, of appreciation of beauty and of a stillness of the soul. And there seems to be some consistency in its conclusions, that separation with ones environment is an illusion, that all life and non life in the universe are different aspects of an underlying Unity; that desires are endless and insatiable and rather than satiation one should attempt to be an Observer of oneself and strive to extinguish the Self. All these are “felt” truths, and bounce off the surface when tried to be understood intellectually. But this is really an eastern brand of “spirituality”.

I guess any genuine search for meaning may be termed as “spirituality”. A search for “inner balance” or nourishment for the spirit/soul/self. That would also bring philosophy under the ambit of spirituality, or at least there is an overlap.  

To be improved..