Director: Lijo Jose Pellissery
![]() |
Pork is the king of Angamaly's cuisine. Another speciality is meat cooked with yam and jackfruit seed. Credit: onmanorama.com |
![]() |
Pork is the king of Angamaly's cuisine. Another speciality is meat cooked with yam and jackfruit seed. Credit: onmanorama.com |
A friend sent me a Youtube presentation outlining the nitty-gritty details of India's new Farm Bill 2020. This news seems to be the flavour of the month that hit most portals dealing with news from India. Pictures of Sikh farmers in a protest demanding justice is making its appearance in most channels. Wanting to research more into this, in an investigative manner, I approached a few of my many friends about it. Everything has to be taken in context, I finally understand.
The first person I interviewed said that he has no opinions as he is a Malaysian, and things that happen in India does not bother him. His ancestors left Punjab because the state could not provide; hence, he has no love lost.
Along the way, I find that the media, which is highly influenced by the West, had a lot of negativities to say about India's 'bad' way of handling the situation. One of the darlings of the liberal society, President Justin Trudeau had a lashing towards India's 'unsympathetic' stance towards people.
Next, an economical èmigrè of Indian stock to Canada had this say. Her Prime Minister was merely echoing the world's sentiments. Only he had the fortitude to verbalise what everyone wanted to say but dare not. My opinion, however, is that she must be seen appeasing her Newfoundland, her masters and not appear showing allegiance to her Bharat Mata.
My research has shown me this. The world is a stage and what is fed to us in the media is a narrative with hidden motives acted by a sleight of hand to fulfil specific agendas. There are more than meets the eye.
In essence, the Bill tries to curb two taunting issues. Firstly, the opening of the market to the farmers and abolition of middlemen. With the change, a farmer can trade his produce with any buyer in any state with the market forces determining its price, not middlemen. For this, the substantial subsidies that the Government is forking out are abolished.The subsidy issue is harped by the Opposition and the breaking India force to vilify Modi. They instigate the farmers to rise to oppose the claimed oppression. Here, the only who tend to lose are the middlemen. After an initial rise in the price of a commodity, the cost of goods would be stabilised by the market forces, according to analysts. The Government asserts that they are not washing their hands of the farmers' and consumers' affairs. They would periodically come in, in times of crisis, to control prices.
The hypocrisy of the Western powers is in display here. At WTO conferences, they chide India for producing cheap produce, under-cutting other producers and reducing their competitiveness. They attribute this to India's generous subsidy to farmers. The support was introduced in the first place for food security after the many famines that it had experienced, including the wheat shortage in the 70s. But, when the support is abolished, they cry foul! The Canadian Prime Minister's rant is political. It is to appease his vote bank; not to mete justice.
One interviewee told me that knowing things like these, something that would not change his day to day, as a means to stimulate his grey cells. He knows what he thinks is insignificant in the void of the Universe. Still, he has a right to have an opinion, rightly or wrongly. Even a bed has a stand, a nightstand. And a pen and an umbrella too.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.
Kumbalangi Nights (Malayalam, 2019)
For the longest time, the idea of a family unit, at least amongst the average middle-class family is that it would comprise a father who would predominantly contribute towards the material needs of the family. A mother would always seem to play second fiddle to the patriarchy but would be a tresure trove of love and affection in abundance. She would oversee the everyday running of the household. On the surface, the mother, the wife, seem to live under the shadow of her husband, dancing to his puppet-strings. In reality, however, she has her own ways of controlling the narratives in her own passive-aggressive way.In modern times, family dynamics have evolved. Not only have the extended family concept where relatives live under the same roof is getting rarer, one has to put up with single parents and same-gender parents. The notion of a male-domination in households is viewed upon as male toxicity.
This movie compares two families, one consisting of four sons growing up all in their own ways, rudderless, with neither a father nor a mother. These boys are actually adults, just doing their own things, without any ideas of their future or working towards any purpose in life. They live day to day drinking and earning only enough to sustain their simple lives. Things change when a woman enters their respective lives. A sense of order seems to trickle in. This is compared to another traditional family with a mother, sister, and a wife only to be led by a patriarchal figure who exudes masculine toxicity. There is order. Food is always there. The female figures ensure cleanliness is maintained. The ugly side of this family surfaces when the sister falls head over heels in love with one of the brothers from the other family. He is considered too wayward and unworthy of her and her family.
The rest of the story is about how resolution comes in the form of families dousing the rage of an obviously deranged toxic head of the girl's family. The film tends to illustrate that the traditional family is terrible. Responsibilities must be shared by all members of the family, and no one person should dominate over the other.
The cinematography is awe-inspiring here. The setting of a riverside, boats, lush tropical greenery and simple way of living helps viewers to bury themselves temporarily in a tropical paradise, away from the hassle and bustle of their busy urban modern live. Even life in Eden has its problems that need to be fixed.
A simple story of a raging buffalo which escapes the slaughterhouse forms the basis of this film. Many in the village are dependent on the buffalo - for the butcher, it is money that it can fetch; for the rival group, it is free meat for their taking; for gangsters, it is a time to show their machoism; for the father whose daughter is getting engaged, he needs to feed his guests; for the ex-convict, it is time to settle a score with the butcher, and the pastor needs to feed his congregation.
Jallikattu is primarily a Tamil tradition, where brave youngsters in a celebratory mood try to tame a raging bull to clutch on to the bag of coins tied to its horn. Hence the name; Jalli @ Salli meaning coin and kattu is a tie-bag. This practice was started as a form of finding the best bull to improve the stock of cows in ancient times. Unfortunately, over the years, it has become a blood sport of sort. Bulls were drugged, and their eyes were sprinkled with chilly powder to blur their vision and agitate them. That was the reason for its recent ban. The practice was later reinstated. Detractors who opposed the prohibition cited concerted international conspiracy to ruin Tamil Nadu's dairy stock and industry and to bring in European brand of dairy cows.
The moviemakers probably decided to name this movie 'Jallikaatu' anyway because that is how the escape of the buffalo had become - everyone joining in the melee to get their hand on the prized bull.
The exciting thing about this story is that all characters are complex. Everyone comes to the scene carrying with them their baggage. Nothing is white or black. Nobody is either good or bad. There is some kind of flaw in everybody. One thing we notice is that everybody is loud, violent and animal-like, much like the beast they are hunting down. In fact, the buffalo is not posing a danger to any of them. Still, the people in the village are making it the single most important thing in their lives that they can afford to spend a couple of days on nothing but apprehending the animal on the loose.
The policeman in the story also has a back story. He has to do his duties as if he has everything under control. In reality, nothing is under wraps. In his home front, he has had it with his demanding wife who keeps harassing him every minute of the day, even when he is busy carrying out his police work. He thinks he has control at work, stumping his authority behind his uniform. He soon realises that the respect that the police receives is only there when people bow to authority. In a mob situation, there is no law and order, only chaos and exhibition of Man's primal instincts.
There is only chaos throughout the movie. Everybody is shouting, and there is pandemonium so every now and then. But within the chaos, there is order. The people still manage to devise strategies to capture the beast.
Equality, equity vs removing the barrier, but enjoying the view from where you stand! |
Watching this movie was a sort of a deja vu experience for me. A close relative had discovered Jesus late in life, and she made it her raison d'être to spread His word. And along she went to all four corners of the country praying for the sick and the fallen. She would personally harbour drug addicts and vagabonds in her home to nurse them back to functionality.
I remember her style. To get her congregation interested in her sermon, out of the blue, she would blurt out 'Hallelujah' on top of her lungs to get approval what she was saying. And an often repeated phrase was that Jesus spoke to her in her dreams. How she would in her usual demonstrative form place her hand on the vertex of her client to pray desperately to chase off the devil that plagued them. She looked sincere and was utterly convinced that she was doing something good. At least it kept her sane.
Well, that is not what this film is trying to highlight. There are people out there who target people's weakness and make a living out cheating desperate people blind. Man created religion to give them a tuft of hope in facing day to day uncertainties of life. Religion is supposed to give them sanity when the storm on Earth becomes too overwhelming. It gives them the assurance that their actions of maintaining peace and order will be rewarded, in this life or after. It absorbs the guilt of the mistakes that he commits at the moment of inebriation. There is a fine line between faith giving peace of mind and it being the cause of lunacy. Extremism negates other points of views. There is a loss of mindfulness and the compulsion to cut off other people beliefs. The guilt of not sticking to the true tenets of religion can turn one into a raving lunatic.
It is beyond comprehension how some people are often lulled into submission by putting the fear of God. The world becomes too complicated for some to strive a living that they get suckered into the promise of divinity in negating all the miseries. And they fall prey to their myths. Rather than resorting to critical thinking, they are deluded with blind faith.
This Malayalam movie tells a tale, perhaps not unreal, of a motivational speaker, mired with a sad family history filled with mental illness and a recent suicide of his brother. He is pulled in by a group of businessmen who use religion to dupe the unsuspecting public into evangelical Christianity and faith healing. Viju Prasad is picked up by a talent corp to be given an intensive course on the Bible and is soon christened Pastor Joshua Carlton (JC, referring to Jesus Christ, of course). JC starts doing 'staged' healing that he himself begins to think that he may indeed have healing powers. His bosses are hot under the collar as JC behaves as if he is the brain behind the whole facade.
This film may be the anthesis of 'Mookuthi Amman'. If Mookuthi Amman pokes fun at Hindu godmen, 'Trance' hits up at the bogus media-savvy megalomaniac pastors who victimise desperate patients who are wit's end to find a cure for their advanced maladies. Fahadh Faasil gives a sterling performance as a doting elder brother and a confused healer who is himself at the brink of a mental breakdown.
Netflix (26 episodes; 2015)
Rabindranath lived at a time when India, as well as the rest of the world, was rapidly changing. His motherland, after missing the bus of the Industrial Revolution, thanks to the British East India Company and the British Empire, was doing catch up. Starting with the First Indian Rebellion @ Sepoy Mutiny in 1857, India had awoken. After being plundered by foreign forces repeatedly, it tried to make social and political changes. Many leaders emerged. Some approached them through political means, others through armed hostility and yet some via passive aggression. Tagore infiltrated the minds with his literary work.
This collection of twenty stories in twenty-six episodes cover a range of issues. The stories were authored by Tagore between 1890 and 1941, just before his death. They talk about the mistreatment of young widows, the evil dowry system, caste system, freedom in terms of Independence and free from incumbrances of life and society. Woman empowerment is a recurring theme, and his characters are mostly strong female characters.
Tagore's seminal novel ' Choker Bali' (Dust in the Eye) starts the series. A young widow tries to seduce the man who turned down her marriage as a revenge to her widowhood and the restrictions imposed on her by society. Atithi (Guest) is about a runaway boy who feels trapped, growing up in a restrictive home environment. He grows up in a zamindar's house only to run away again when marriage is proposed upon him with the landlord's daughter. There are just too much to learn from the world than to be exclusively tied down in one place.
'Maanbhajan' (Fury Appeased) is about another woman empowerment story. Left by her husband for an actress, the wife, fascinated by the theatre, becomes a famous actress herself in a poetic 'tit-for-tat' move.
The series also includes a light comedy (Detective and Dhai Aakhar Prem Ka), a delve into the paranormal (Kankal and Monihara), a retelling of Satyajit Ray's 'Charulata' (Nastarinh), loneliness (Waaris), inclusiveness (Kabuliwalla), familial sacrifice (Shasthi), servile loyalty (Wafadaar), on domineering familial hierarchy (Aparchita and Mrinal ki Chitti) and the futility of vengeance (Dalia).
Rabindranath Tagore differed with some of the views held by Gandhi. Even though both fought for freedom, Tagore also wanted escapism from the clutches of unreasonable traditional beliefs. He also had the impression that we should embrace modernity Interestingly, Gandhi, who opposed the introduction of railways into India, used the Indian trains to disseminate all his ideologies to the masses. Both of them also had contrary outlooks of sex and relationships. Whilst Gandhi experimented with sexual abstinence, Tagore was freewriting about domestic issues and intrafamilial problems.
The series was a feast for the eyes. Kudos for the cinematography for bringing out the best in the outdoor camerawork can do. Viewers are transported back to the 1920s pre-Independent pre-Partition Bengal, complete with the serene and tranquil greenery, the props and costumes that befit the era. It is a joy to view the old Victorian-styled buildings and bulky antique furniture. It is highly recommended.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.