RIFLE RANGE BOY: satire

Showing posts with label satire. Show all posts

Sunday, 8 February 2026

No one would harm a penguin, except Batman!

My fascination with penguins started long ago during the transitional period when colour TV was slowly being introduced. There was a time, as a teenager, when the greatest excitement around the neighbourhood was knowing which home had a colour TV. Looking across the flat facing mine, I could guess which units had the latest device, which was the talk of the time, which was the flickering flash of hues emanating from each unit. Maybe its occupants purposely watch TV with the lights off to show the world they have indeed arrived!

I was once watching someone's TV during an ongoing show. I had a hard time deciding whether his TV was monochrome or colour. It was a long-shot scene from Antarctica, with a lone penguin walking against a pristine white snow background. That is when I realised that a penguin can fit into any world without creating a fuss. It also struck me that a penguin can be an unassuming animal, just minding its own business, walking, flipping its flippers and squawking all day.

I later discovered that my sisters, who were both in Convent School, had a name for the nun school caretakers: penguins. Dressed in long black robes, with their hands tucked behind their backs, they would suddenly appear at the back of the class unannounced. Against the bright light in the background, they would appear like penguins when students turned to find the nun at the back of the class.

The reference to penguins came again in the late 80s when I was in university. The Iranian Revolution had succeeded, and sympathisers were hopeful of a return to the glory days of the Ottoman Empire. Islamic dressing was the flavour of the day, and pretty soon people were moving around in black garb, complete with black facial veils and gloves. There were even five medical students at the university who had such fashion sense. These 'penguins', as they were referred to by fellow culture-shocked students, were politely told to pursue other academic fields which avoided public interactions.

Embrace the penguin
Times of India

After MH370's disappearance, the South Seas were mentioned as a possible area where the wreckage could be found. I started watching documentaries about these seas and the lands surrounding them, which are described as the harshest places on Earth. Penguins came up yet again. The story of their survival, chicks waiting in winter for their parents to bring food, grow, mate, lay eggs, partners taking turns incubating, all within a short window of opportunity and under the prancing eyes of the predators is just amazing.

Recently, I watched an episode of Season 5 of 'Slow Horses'. Penguins came up again. A group of terrorists sent a warning to the police that they meant business. They detonated a bomb in, of all places, the zoo. The casualty, penguins. One of the investigators cursed, "Who the heck hates penguins?" Another replied, "Batman!"

Almost serendipitously, a certain world leader expressed his intention to control Greenland, which was thought to be a giant icy wasteland all this time. Newspapers tried to showcase the case to the world, complemented by a picture of Trump walking towards an icy oblivion, leading a penguin by its flipper.

Instead of creating awareness of the heady direction US foreign policy was heading, the picture soon became the showpiece of how PR companies could go wrong. Netizens were quick to educate Trump's PR team that penguins do not live anywhere near the Arctic Circle, definitely not in Greenland.

Antarctica - Encounters at the End of the World
The Nihilistic Penguin

Netizens also noted that the penguin picture bore a strong resemblance to the one that appeared in the 2007 documentary 'Encounters at the End of the World' by Werner Herzog. The documentary maker noted that, rather than following the herd, which tends to stay by the sea where its food is, that particular penguin decided to venture away from the pack. At a glance, it appeared the penguin was certainly on its way to meet its maker, which is probably what happened. No matter what the modern management guru may say about taking the path least travelled, what lay ahead of the animal was miles and miles of ice, and more ice. That earned the penguin a quirky nickname, 'nihilistic penguin'. The scientists in the show explained that occasionally one or two penguins stray away from the pack. A possible reason for this behaviour could be spatial disorientation or a brain infection. Scientists, amongst themselves, have an agreed code. Whenever they observe any behaviour in animals that would endanger themselves, they generally do not intervene. They let nature take its course.

So, the image of Trump leading the penguin spells doom and gloom for both Greenland and the USA. Would anyone interfere, or would everyone just let nature take its course?

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

Monday, 10 June 2024

Retelling of Ramayana?

The Monkey Man (2024)

Director: Dev Patel

At first look, one is forgiven for thinking it was going to be a non-cerebral offering with senseless violence, gore, pyrotechnics and stunts that defy science principles. On further viewing, one would assume there would be lots of Indian bashing, Hindu culture ridiculing and Modi shaming. It cannot be so wrong.

Far from it, this is also an attempt to retell the Ramayana story. In the Ramayana narration of events around 5000 BCE, King Rama was exiled for 14 years into the forest after political arm-twisting led by his stepmother. Raavan became the villain when Rama turned down Ravana's sister, Shurpanakha's sexual advancement. Her antics got her nose slashed off. Raavan kidnapped Rama's wife, Sita. Rama, in search of his missing wife, Sita, befriended Hanuman, and the rest is history, as written by Valmiki and others.

In the Ramayana, Rama and Hanuman are on the side of the truth, whereas Raavan, with his 10 branches of wisdom, assumes the protagonist role. However, this film version deliberately mixes up the roles of the hero and villain.

Monkey Man is a streetfighter who appears regularly at an underground no-holds-barred mixed martial arts fight scene for a measly stash of cash. He has a dark secret from his past for which a score must be settled.

In that town, there is a heartless businesswoman who basically controls all the vices around. The men in power support her activities—the police chief and his yeomen, the strongmen in town, the politicians, and the saffron-robed man of God.

The fighter, @ Bobby, @Kid, grew up as a tribal kid with his loving mother at the edge of the forest, but greedy businessmen ruthlessly burned their house to take over their land. His mother was lit alive by the police chief right in front of his eyes in his childhood - hence the need to avenge.

To build up the climax to the eventual destruction of the corrupt system, the audience is feasted to (or has to sit through, depending on your taste) minutes of swashbuckling and pumping of adrenaline done in the veins of 'Kill Bill', 'War of the Dogs' or any of the Hong Kong fast-paced kungfu movie fast-moving cameras. Actually, the action sequences are of high standards.

The way I see this movie is told is that of a modern tale of Ramayana. A leftist embroiled in anti-Hindu sentiments always looked at modern Rama as an intruder. He intruded on the forest, initially occupied by the Adivasis, to upset their equilibrium by invading their space and hunting their food. In a screwed-up way, in modern-day Ramayana, Ravana is not the lone villain but has joined forces with Rama. Symbolically, Rama is referred to as the safron-clad religious man. He is in cahoots with other branches of power. Allegorically, they are represented in the ten heads of Ravana.

So, Hanuman, as the last man standing, has to go rogue to defend his people. He is Bobby @ Kid, trying to right the wrong, undoing the sins of the religious leaders, tycoons, political leaders, the police and the whole cabal of oppressors of the marginalised.

At the end of the day, even though it was filmed in Batam, Indonesia, the whole show primarily aims to paint India as a lawless country. By repeatedly showing Hindu iconography in many of its frames, it tries to showcase Hindu culture as twisted. Everyone is corrupt, and there can be no redemption.

Is it a mere coincidence that its release is eerily in the year when India, the biggest democracy, is about to re-elect Modi for an unprecedented third time? Still, the movie has a high entertainment quotient and high-value production. It is highly recommended for the curious-minded who do not mind the occasional head-butting. (Or is it butthurt?)

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

Friday, 29 March 2024

Death can be a satire?

A Case of Exploding Mangoes

Author: Mohammed Hanif

On 17th August 1988, President Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq of Pakistan was killed in an aircraft crash. Perishing together with him on the Hercules C-130 military aircraft were the President’s close assistant Akhtar Abdur Rehman, American diplomat Arnold Lewis Raphel and 27 others.

In the rest of the world, a country owns an army. In Pakistan, however, its Army own the country. In 1976, Prime Minister Bhutto elevated ul-Haq to a full general. One year later, he deposed Bhutto and declared martial law. Bhutto was hanged for treason.

Ul-Haq’s 11-year tenure as the Supremo saw him announce Pakistan as a nuclear nation, aided Afghanistan to fight the Soviets and secured himself as a prominent Islamist leader. In a way, he was instrumental in making Pakistan a theocratic country and the rise of global Islamic terrorism.

The crash was extensively investigated by many quarters, but nothing was conclusive. The possible theories range from aircraft failure, as the C-130 was notoriously famous for faulty equipment, to sabotage by Americans, Soviets, Mossad, the Pakistani Army, and even Bhutto’s dependents.

Mohamad Hanif, the author of this book and the head of BBC Urdu service, was consumed by the crash. The interviews he conducted did not reveal much. The aircraft did carry mangoes. A rope was found among the debris. Someone suggested the possibility of explosives in mango seeds and the usage of poisonous gas to incapacitate the pilots as the craft plunged head down suddenly.

In most countries, too, something so sombre, like the death of a leader, is not sneered upon. This rule may not apply to Pakistan. Because of the restriction of freedom of speech, Pakistanis have volumes of jokes about their leaders. Every other day, even its immediate neighbour finds pleasure in mocking Pakistan. So, it is not surprising to read the humorous narration of the moments before Zia-ul-Haq’s demise in this light-hearted satire.

Even though the exact cause of the crash is not explained and the real perpetrators of the accident are not told, it seems like everyone had a burning desire to see the President die - the Pakistani Army, a Trade Union leader, the curse of the imprisoned blind gang-rape victim or a disgruntled soldier whose father was killed by Zia. A crow, possibly intoxicated by the nectar of the sweet Pakistani mango, may have a hand in it, too. The aircraft also carried such a heavy load of mangoes, so aromatic that it filled the whole vessel that the air conditioning need not be switched on. VX gas filled the machine when it was switched on later, and we know what happened next.

(Dedicated to RK, a Pakistani-Hindu from the Sindh Province, who paints a rather rosy image of his Motherland contrary to the perception of the rest of the world.)

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

Friday, 5 May 2023

No perfect system!

Triangle of Sadness (2022)
Director: Ruben Östlund

This is a black comedy, a satire of modern society, sniggering at the changes society has been undergoing over the years. At different parts of the film, it shows us how we fit snuggly into our roles with only one purpose (or maybe two) in life - to usurp lots of money. Power will come rolling in with moolah.

It hints at how gender roles are reversed, with ladies earning more than men. Despite their demands for equal rights and equality, they conveniently use the 'damsel-in-distress' card and chivalry when it suits them. Sex is used as a bargaining chip.

We are told that beauty is on the inside, but seeing people making a fortune from their external appearances is illogical. The whole of show biz, the fashion industry and even influencers on social media are centred around aesthetics and exhibitionism to a certain degree. They do not bring anything 'value-added' to the table of human civilisational progress. Coincidentally, the movie's title refers to a medical term used by plastic surgeons to demarcate the area between the eyebrows that carry the 'worry wrinkle', which is treated with Botox.

The movie's second part showcases the opulence of the super-rich, their wasteful actions and their overindulgences in basic necessities of sustenance. Just being at the right place at the right time, their fortunes changed. With a little bit of quick thinking, they seized their opportunities and paved the path of the aristocracy for the next generation. In the film, a capitalist Russian hit a business 'landmine' when he packaged chicken droppings from his chicken farm into a mega fertiliser industry. Paradoxically, the cruise captain the characters travel on is a drunkard Communist American. Ironically, the American thinks capitalism is flawed, whilst the Russian says down with Communism.

We are shown how the crew on the Cruise, including the unseen and unheard workers in the engine room, cleaners and kitchen staff, literally break their backs to dance to the whims and fancies of every wealthy oligarch on board.

A side joke is about an elderly couple who made a fortune making grenades for third-world countries to bomb each other into pieces. Their characters were aptly named Winston and Clementine, with reference to the UK World War 2 Prime Minister and his beloved wife, of course. In a poetic justice style, they die when terrorists hurl a similar grenade at their ship.

In the final part of the movie, only a few people aboard survive the bomb blast and are marooned on a deserted island. Here, the role reverses. The pompous rich people have no survival skills. They have to live on the fishing and outdoor skills of a lowly Filipino housekeeping manager. Money is no more the equation here anymore. The Filipina tries to rule the roost with her knowledge of providing meals. The hierarchy is broken. Now, she tries to garner favour from her special status.

The ending is purposely left hanging. The real reason for this type of ending is precisely this. No system seems to be fair to all of mankind. An obviously top-down approach will create resentment. The people at the top will utilise whatever means available to them to stay there and to ensure similar lives for their offspring, no matter how dumb and uninitiated or lazy they are. True talent will be lost.

On the contrary, a genuinely equal system will not make the cut. There must be some kind of motivation for people to look forward to. Altruism, a good afterlife or some sort of existential reason will not sell. Pol Pot and Lenin tried and failed. The Money God will just do the trick. China, under Mao, preached true Communism and see what it brought them - famine, imprisonment and low morale. Once Deng Xaio Peng opened the country to capitalist practices, we saw China becoming a threat that even the poster child of capitalism, the USA, had to retaliate against.