What is love, anyway?

One Day (2024)
Miniseries E1-14.

“Hey, why are you watching this,” asked my daughter. “This is for youngsters like me.”

“I know. I just wanted to know how things have changed since the last time I heard about that good-natured four-letter word called love.” I replied. 

Just what is this thing called love? Is it a contract as flimsy as one drawn on water or a covenant written in stars that only the might of Time can erase? When one confesses or as much as loves someone with his heart and soul, what do we really mean? Is it a promise to preserve my seeds for the continuity of progeny? Is the place for love in the heart or mind too small to be shared by others? 

Suppose there are other variants of love, i.e. brotherly love, patriotism (love for the nation), gluttony (love for food), various fetishes (model planes, stamps, cars, etc.), and filial piety. Why can’t there be platonic love between a male or female (or preferred gender)? Is the concept of ‘friends-with-benefits’ even acceptable? Is sex so sacrosanct that it can only be sanctioned by the forces of Nature that make the Universe exist, or is it a merely biological process to ensure the continuity of species?

Does society want to put a name on the people who have to carry the burden (responsibility) of upbringing the product of a conjugal union? Even the Universe is playing Devil’s Advocate by putting pleasure in the place meant for work, i.e. continuity of species!

Based on a novel by David Nicholls from 2009, it was made into a feature film in 2011, starring Anne Hathaway in the lead role. Netflix made a limited series of the story, garnering critical acclaim. Set in the UK, pandering to the demand of the time, a brown actress is cast in the lead role. 

A misfit pair gets together at a graduation night party at the University of Edinburgh. Even though every graduate wants to bed somebody to make the night a night to remember, Emma, from the middle class, and Dexter, from the privileged class, just end up chatting the night away, talking about their future plans and such. 

They part ways the morning after but promise to stay in touch. They meet each other periodically. The show shows the ups and downs that they go through over the years. Each episode starts on the 15th of July every year, starting with the graduation ball that day in 1988. Over the years, their lives tangents off away from each other, finding their mojos, threading the good times and bad. They keep in touch, nevertheless. Their fondness for each other remains. Something that had been platonic had turned romantic. The question is, when? Did it happen in Edinburgh? Was it the culmination of the experiences taught at the School of Hard Knocks? 

Which is the hay that broke the camel’s back? When does love happen? Can we love more than one at a time? Is it a one-or-none law? Is it a promissory note to limit conjugal liaisons to avoid unnecessary baggage thereof?  

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

A historical fiction

Ponniyin Selvan Part 1(பொன்னியின் செல்வன், Tamil; 2022)
Director: Mani Ratnam

Kalki first published these fictionalised historical stories back in the 1950s in a weekly magazine. The stories were penned by Kalki Subramaniam and printed in Kalki magazine in Chennai. These stories were hugely popular and had developed a cult following. People were fascinated with the vivid narration and witty dialogue. The publication's readership at one time was 71,366 - a formidable number in newly independent India. Kalki Subramaniam had been a freedom fighter.

As early as the late 50s, attempts have been made to make a movie of Kalki's 'Ponniyin Selvan'. MG Ramachandran bought the rights to the story but failed due to financial constraints. Mani Ratnam attempted it in the 1980s and 2010s but failed again. After the delays posed by the pandemic, it finally hit the silver screens in 2022. 

Now, this film is said to be the fourth highest-grossing Tamil movie of all time, and people are singing praises of the movie. A blog reader watched it and said she did not quite understand the story. As I expected, the characters were too many, and the names were too mind-bending for an average occasional Tamil speaker and non-speaker to register. The dialogue can be considered too courteous for general consumption, as most Tamil movie dialogues are crude and rude. There were clearly no comedic actors to crack mindless slapstick and jokes. Again, this is another essential ingredient for a wholesome Indian picture where the audience will find money's worth. In PS-1, the dialogue is witty, and the comedic component is packaged in wordplay. I wonder if any Malaysian audiences who watched the movie with me in the cinema read the innuendos between the lines.

I have to confess that when a 13-year-old me watched 'Star Wars' when everyone else was singing praises of it, I too agreed with them. In reality, I could not understand the whole storyline, but not to appear dumb, I followed the herd. 

Maybe, because this movie is promoting nationalism at a time when the whole world becoming less tolerant of each other, it plucks the heartstrings of many. That was precisely the intention of Kalki Subramaniam, an Indian freedom fighter when he penned the series of stories. Kalki would have been very proud of his work as it is portrayed on the silver screen.

The cinematography and the special effects are of high quality, way above what is generally seen in most Indian movies. The artwork involving adventures (or rather misadventures) on the high seas was almost reminiscent of the 'Pirates of the Caribbean series. 

Ponniyin Selvan 1 is a historical fiction of the life of times of young Arunmozhi Varman in the 10th century CE before he became the great Chola Emperor Raja Raja Cholan. He was referred to as 'Ponniyin Selvan' - the son of Ponni. Ponni is the other name for the River Kaveri. Legend has it that the spirit of the River had saved Arunmozhi from drowning, hence the nickname. 

As in politics then and now, frequent backstabbing and doublecrossing were going on to usurp power. In that climate, brothers Aditha Karkalan and Arunmozhi Varman have to stand tall, fight the schemers and protect the throne in a series of swashbuckling adventures and death-defying moments.

Sure, the history of Man was never peaceful. At no time were Man cordial with his neighbours. They found ingenious ways to differentiate one from another. I could not help but notice that the scriptwriters purposely tried to suggest animosity between Shaivites (Shiva worshippers) and Vaishvanites (Vishnu worshippers). But I always thought that in ancient India (and now), heterogenicity was embraced. It remains the only land that was not hostile towards Jews and accepted Zoroastrian refugees when Islamic invaders chased them away from Persia. There are even Chinatowns in India.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Put those grey cells to use!

Death on the Nile (1978, 2022)

Director, Actor: Kenneth Branagh.

Almost 85 years after its publication, readers and moviegoers are still discussing Agatha Christie's novel, 'Death on the Nile'. Her recurring character, the eccentric Belgian detective Hercules Poirot still excites writers and readers alike.

After watching almost the whole season of Poirot's TV series, I thought it would be pertinent to compare David Suchet's role as Poirot to the two other actors who tried to create this character - Peter Ustinov and Kenneth Branagh. In reality, maybe 10 over actors tried their hand at giving life to this moustachioed fictional character.

David Suchet as Poirot

Personally, I vote David Suchet as the best Poirot actor. Maybe I had too much time indulging in the complete Poirot TV series. The TV series, episodes over episodes, builds a more composite image of the detective and exposes more and more of his personality as he delves deep into his cases. Suchet's portrayal shows an obsessive-compulsive man with his quirky habits. He gave an aura of a chirpy middle-aged man with a dark past behind him.

Kenneth Branagh as Poirot

Kenneth Branagh's 2022 Poirot is a bitter man who never got over losing his wife-to-be. He carries the burden of guilt for requesting her to take the train trip that proved fatal. He seems to be holding his sorrow on his sleeves. Poirot's usual comical antics seem missing as the tone of melancholy overhangs any possibility of a fun moment.

The Ustinov version, in my opinion, is the least appealing of the three that I have watched. In the 1978 version, he looks more like a bystander, and other actors seem to overshadow his presence. 

Top R - Bottom L
Tony Randall, Albert Finney (Oscar nominee), Peter Ustinov, Ian Holm,
David Suchet, Alfred Molina,  Kenneth Branagh, John Malkovich.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Follow

 

We, the people?

Grapes of Wrath (1940)
Director: John Ford
A novel by John Steinbeck

A typical scene in a big establishment when a crisis looms. When a patient is discharged from a hospital and has to speak to somebody who has the authority to give a discount, he will be given a runaround. Nobody has the power to approve that slash in the bill. It is always about the system, or the management has to decide. Who is managing, they may ask? Nobody can give a straight answer as a management team is not one person, and his job his not permanent. Even the CEO has to safeguard his career - too much of a discount-and may lose his job. Same with a big establishment like a bank. Even the bank manager emphasises with his loyal customers, his hands are tight. He has to toe the line of stock-owners and continue squeezing the debtor for dues. 

All the big establishments invoke the fear of the weight of powers that be upon the weak. The elites and powerful side of the society are constantly rubbing shoulder with the authority and the corporations. This unholy alliance creates a deep fissure in the community, as the haves and have-nots fleet further and further away from each other. In times of calamities, this becomes apparent; the effective use of all the resources upon their disposal to pounce upon the poor ensures that the rich continue enjoying their living style. 

If history has taught us anything, we realise that the widening of economic prowess is a perfect recipe for a revolution. When they feel powerless against a perceived autocratic system, people will raise their working tools in solidarity to fight back. We saw it in the French and Bolshevik revolutions. Hunger is a potent trigger to change the course of history.

Logically, we should soon be seeing the effects of a year of Covid-induced lockdown. Civil servants continued receiving whilst the self-employed had to tighten their belts with loss of income and the inconveniences of multiple Government restrictive policies.

After the initial euphoria of the end of WW1, the world plunged into an economic depression in 1929. The weather was also against their side for the Joad family in Oklahoma. The family has to leave their farmland as the bank pressures them for outstanding payments. The family with other Okies (Oklahomans) leave their Dust Bowl State for California in their rickety truck, together with Tom, who had just been out of prison. After enduring a treacherous journey, they soon discover that California is no promised land. There is starvation, oppression by the authorities, bullying by employers and police's unholy union, and restrictions on personal liberties. 

John Steinbeck's 1939 novel is a Pulitzer-winning classic with much Reds undertone and is used as reading in many American schools. He went on to win the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1962 for that work. The book is a stark reminder that the subject matter discussed can be topical at any period. The poor will always remain impoverished despite advances in science, technology, and economic leaps and bounds. The rich and those in power will always devise ways to keep them under their thumbs. New laws will be instituted, taxes will be adjusted to accommodate the rich and novel ideas will prop up to entice the downtrodden to dance to the big conglomerates' tune.

The title 'The Grapes of Wrath' may have a Biblical reference. In the Book of Revelation, an angel swung his sickle to the earth and gathered the clusters from the vine of the world, and threw them into the great winepress of the wrath of God [14:19-20]. Grapes, when pressed, will morph into a divine and spirited drink. Hence, when the workers are oppressed for too long, they would rise to wreak justice upon greedy and self-serving landowners and bankers. The filmmakers had to modify the storyline to not arouse legislators' curiosity when Hollywood was mainly targeted for subtly spreading communist's sentiments.

The phrase 'grapes of wrath' also appears in Julia Ward's composition of 1861 'The Battle Hymn of the Republic', a famous American patriotic song.

Roman Charity: Pero secretly breastfeeds her father,
Cimon who is sentenced to death by starvation
Peter Paul Rubens

The word 'Okies' in the 1930s was a derogatory word of sorts. It denoted westward-bound white migrant agricultural workers from cotton-growing states from the east. In 1937, California brought in the 'Anti Okie Law' to make it illegal to bring in any destitute person. It was later revoked as unconstitutional.

Not everyone in the USA, especially the Californians, took in kindly to Steinbeck's book. The idea of Americans treating their own kind with so much scorn and cruelty was too repulsive. The idea of our cooperative type of setup like the one in a communist/socialist nation instead of American democracy in solving the poors' misery was offensive. To top it all, the book presents a character who performs an act of Roman Charity. She nurses a sick and starving man.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Enough of stereotyping already!

The White Tiger (2021)
Netflix

This is your typical Hollywood's stereotyping of Indian society - that the country is dysfunctional, divided by class and wealth. It paints a picture of a place where humanity had died replaced by a selfish group of people who assess the other from the lens of birth, caste and money. Survival of the fittest is the name of the game. Subservience is kept under check with mystical mumbo jumbo about life's purpose and punishment of previous births' sins. Poverty is endemic, so is filth and need for sadhu-like NRI saviours to save the day with the knowledge acquired from 'civilised' nations, so the film portrays. It showcases a world where only criminals and politicians thrive. The rest are merely accidental to make the numbers.

Again and again, these Hollywood flicks paint a stereotypical paint of the whole of India, one of toxic caste division. They reinforce the idea of the fable of Great Indian Rooster Coop of which all the chickens in the coop can see their fellow occupants being slaughtered one by one, yet they are so subservient that they just stick their neck when it time. No, they do not re-tell the story of The Shepherd and his sacrificial lambs!

An erudite once said this about the existence of caste in India. The division of people by caste was a European construct. The caste is not Indian to start with. It is served from the Portuguese/Iberian word 'casta' meaning lineage. In the Hindu tradition, division of people into caste are birth but by qualities. Even within a family, different children are born with variable aptitude or predilection. One may be a scholarly person (a Brahmin in his outlook), another very outdoors and athletic (Kshatriya in quality) or very entrepreneurial with business shrewdness (Vaisha).

On the other hand, some are just hardworking work-horses. It is often quoted of a Brahmin boy, earning a princely sum, working in a multinational leather shoe company after completing his MBA. How can one define his work by birth? Born a Brahmin, academically sound like a Brahmin is typified, indulged in a Vaisha trade, dealing with leathers - an area designated to the low caste! Caste division is more and more looked upon as a British tool to 'divide and rule'.

The division of people is by no means is a construct confined to the Indian society. It is as old as the origin of civilisation itself. Watch 'The Crown' and see how a privileged family who brings nothing in value to the national gross domestic gets all the special treatment in late 1960 as the UK braced itself with austerity drive, scurrying for bail-outs and devaluation of its currency.  See the turn of events at Washington DC following Trump's defeat and appreciate the disparity in the population of the most prosperous nation on Earth. George Floyd's brutal treatment and demise open a dirty bag of the worms of bigotry and racism. 

Nevertheless, I enjoyed the movie for its entertainment value. I liked its atypical narration and the dark theme associated with the story. A person is nice to another because it is the civil thing to do. Or he may need the job. We love our elders and masters behind a facade of loathing, and we loathe them behind the mask of love. People are like pressure cookers. They take in all the heat and beating until such a time that they explode extruding a magma of emotive aggression.

It tells the tale of an ambitious boy from a village who works as a driver with a local gangster cum influencer businessman. He takes all the abuses and denigration until he is told to admit to a hit-and-run automobile accident driven by his boss' wife.

(P.S. This film is an adaptation of Aravind Adiga’s 2008 Booker-winning novel. With the creative licence, the filmmakers made specific changes to put some stars in a better light to not spoil their image. As pointed by a friend, RV, an erudite critique, the book was written at a time of a different India, in 2008. Much water has passed under that bridge. In the wise words of the Greek philosopher, Heraclitus,  'No man ever steps into the same river twice; for it is not the same river, and he is not the same man'.)

Follow

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Start a revolution from my bed?

Hunt for Red October (1990)

Many keyboard warriors are so convinced by what they see online. They fail to understand why others are so dumb (in their eyes, of course). To them, truth our there is as clear as day. And everyone else just ought to follow, no questions asked. What these modern warriors or influencers, as they are referred to these days, need to know is that sometimes we become too blinded with our beliefs that we fail to practice mindfulness. They should wear another hat and maybe a different colour lens, other than rose, to get a different perspective on things. A revolution cannot be started by an army of one. It begins with the revolution of the collective minds and hearts of the people. This change is difficult, more so in modern times, as we are so divided by ideologies, cultures, faiths and identity.

This film is based on Tom Clancy's 1984 novel which in turn was loosely based on Soviet Union's 1975 attempted mutiny aboard a warship. In the 1975 revolt, a brand-new Russian frigate, Storozhevoy, is hijacked by its Third Rank Captain, Valery Sablin. He was convinced that Leonid Brezhnev's Soviet Union had lost its original Leninist's visions. The system was plagued with corruption and lies. Sablin wanted to use the hijack as a political statement to stir the Russian to engage in its Second Revolution. His plan fell flat, and he and his fellow men were incarcerated.

Storozhevoy

In the book and the film version, the warship was changed to a spanking new state-of-art nuclear-powered radar-escaping submarine. A rogue Russian Captain uses the invincibility of the sub to defect to the USA. The problem is the US Navy does not know of his intention and are wary of the intrusion of a Russian submarine in international waters. At the same time, the Russian authorities realise the rogue Captain's plan. The Russians are at wit's end to stop the Americans from laying their hands on Russia's highly advanced submarine. 

The highly suspenseful drama describes how the US Navy manages to save the day. They help the Russian crew to defect, rescue the submarine and embarrass the Russian at their own game.

It is naive to believe that truth will always prevail in the end. Things in real life are much more convoluted than that. The power brokers, financiers, the leaders, big pharma companies and the media moguls have the final say of how history ought to be written. Poetic justice and honesty are left to pacify the romantics. It is the rule of the majority. Annoyance from the minority can be easily boomeranged back to the senders by the powers that be (spoiler alert). 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The destructive force of obsession!

The Librarian (2017)

Author: Kavitha Rao

One of the problems identified to have inflicted the vast majority of people of the 21st century is their over-attachment to their mobile devices. They seem to be engrossed in their gizmos that it is sometimes comical to see them walking like zombies. They appear as if they are talking to their imaginary friends, all complete with hand gestures and explosive curses. Sometimes they become oblivious to their surroundings, walking through glass-doors or moving vehicles. They seem so engrossed in their gadgets that I would not be surprised if they are unaware if somebody jocularly strips them down.

Well, it is not much different than how it used to be when I was growing up. An acquaintance of mine, while immersed in his spy-thriller novel, had his house burgled right under his nose (not really under his nose but rather with his presence). Amma also used to complain my sister and I were too buried in our books. She accused us of using the need to study as an excuse not to do what is expected from us, children, to help around the house doing simple chores. We have to confess. We were sometimes engaged in leisurely readings.

Kavitha Rao, Lucknow; 2018.

In Amma's eyes, we were sometimes too engrossed that we lost track of the ground we stood on -- no different from the 21st-century zombies who live in alternative universes.

At what level do we lose the ability to differentiate what is important and what is not? Sometimes we are so passionate about something that we lose our bearings and fail to appreciate something so important as life itself. This novel tells the tale of a bibliophile with her dream job at the library. It narrates her struggle to satiate her appetite for books and, perhaps, live in her make-believe world of fictions and the characters from those books.
She works in an ancient library which had seen better times and faces the risk of being shut down due to lack of funds and readership.

The book is an interesting and descriptive one that manages to keep the interest of the readers right till the end.

https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/riflerangeboy/

Patriotism to whom?

Stalking Crimes (2018)

Author: V.G. Kumar Das

The author was trepidatious with publishing such a book. It seems that there is an unwritten rule in the country that writings, even fictions, can only put the country in a favourable light. She cannot be portrayed to be a nation filled with crime, corrupt officials or religious xenophobes. That is why he took the liberty to publish an e-book rather than a physical book as that would be fraught with frivolous bureaucratic obstacles and unnecessary stresses. That is what the new set of leaders are promising - an open society which dares to confront the uncomfortable questions that we, as a nation, are facing. That is not going to be an overnight transformation. The community, ever so immersed in a feudalistic mindset and the culture of not wanting to be controversial, needs time to adjust to the new milieu.

People say that the idea of the nation-state is foreign to people on this side of the world. Before immigration policies were meted out in the 20th century, our borders used to so porous that it was a norm for people to move between countries for economic and social activities. That is why we have leaders who proudly announce their heritage without any embarrassment to their nationality. In this era of increasing nationalism, one wonders where their loyalties lie. Another ideology that seems to be creeping into their the society is loyalty to a common belief system rather than to the country. I think some Muslims in India had this same quandary during World War 1. Musslamans were divided whether to show patriotism to their colonial masters who were hellbent on destroying the last bastion of Islamic representation in the world, the Ottoman Empire, or to the de-facto leader of the Islamic world.

In the modern world, foes and friends, find a commonality in religion even if the intent is evil. Many hide under the cloak of religion to pursue their selfish agenda. The simpleton amongst shrivel at the mention of divinity and set aside our prejudice for Him to judge. How convenient for the wrongdoers? The name of God as an 'out-of-jail' free card!

Even though humanity dictates that we should all be Good Samaritans; help a fellow brother in need. Somehow, when it comes to our respective countries, we become selfish. We want to guard our borders against those who do not pledge allegiance to the same flag. Maybe it is not the flag which is the determinant but economics. People of a nation want to keep their wealth to share out among their citizen. They worked hard at keeping their backyard in order, hence, only they deserve to enjoy the fruit of their labour.  

Even though our educational levels and intellectual competence have surged over the years, the innate human desire to dominate through power and violence seems unabated. We try to beat the system, circumvent the law, cheat, forge, lie, create mayhem and even kill to make our evil plans see light. 

A new novel set in a new environment, oft not mentioned in the mainstream, becomes the backdrop to an adventure to a nail-biting escapade for law enforcer Zain Abidin. A fascinating, easy read featuring topics close to the heart of most Malaysians; religious fundamentalism, racial violence, unregulated immigration, corrupt practice of people in power and the nostalgia of a nation we used to be.

We have often read about the capital city and the exotic lands of the east coast of the Peninsular and East Malaysia. Many of us are in the dark of the existence of an archaeologically rich area around Lenggong in the state of Perak. Herein was discovered the skeletal remains of a man dubbed 'Perak Man' who lived 11,000 years ago. Royal Belum Rainforest, which is said to the oldest of the tropical jungles of the world is the backdrop to the set of this novel.

 https://asok22.wixsite.com/real-lesson 

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.