Crouching Tiger...ki mausi !

Seen from Nitin's balcony in Bombay -- a "Cat" rider !













" Don't Mess with me..."
















" Aati kya ? "
















" Nahi aati..to apun chala.."

Ghalib's Naqsh Fariyadi

Mirza Ghalib needs no introduction to followers of Urdu poetry. Reproduced below is one of his most difficult to understand (at least I felt so!) poem. The accompanying translation is credited to Dr. Sarfaraz K. Niazi. The beauty of the poem is in its nuances, so if you do read, read it more than once, and I am sure you will discover more than one meaning in this great work...

Enjoy...

The poem-
Naqsh faryaadi hai kiski shaukhi-e tehreer ka
Kagazi hai pairahan har paikar-e tasveer ka

Kaay-kaay-e-sakht-janeeha-e tanhai na poochh
Subha karna shaam ka lana hai juu-e-sheer ka

Jazbah-e-bey-ikhtiyaar-e shouk deykha chahiye
Sinah-e shamseer sey baahar hai dum shamsheer ka

Aagahee daam-e shunidan jis qadar chaahey bichhaaye
Mudad aa anka hai apney aalam-e takreer ka

Baski hoon Ghalib aseeri mein bhi aatish zer-e pa
Muu-e aatish-deedah hai halkah meri zanjeer ka.

and the translation...

Naqsh faryadi hai kis ki shokhi-e tahrir ka
kaghazi hai pairahan her paikar-e tasvir ka

Against whose playful writing are the words complainants?
Made of paper is the attire of the countenance of every image.



[naqsh: mark, word; faryadi: pleader, crier; shokh: playful, mischievous; kaghaz: paper; tahrlr. writing; pairahan: attire, clothes; paikar: face, countenance, figure, mould, model, form, portrait, likeliness, an idol-temple; tasvir: forming, fashioning, painting, limning, picture, image, effigy, likeness, sketch, drawing.]

This opening verse of Ghalib's Urdu ghazal divan is critical of God in a rather unusual manner—with an element of surprise! In it, Ghalib alludes to God's neglect and obliviousness towards us. "Whose mischief was it to create this Universe?" the first line asks in a rather perplexed manner. This would have been a straightforward ode to the Lord if in the first verse the poet had not raised the question, "who has done it?" but instead stated, "He did it." This would have been in line with the tradition of making the first verse an ode to the Lord. This is followed by a description of the sheer helplessness of humankind— all that is visible (or corporeal) in the Universe is clad in "paper dress," as if pleading or bowing before the Lord in awe. This construction of "pleading in paper attire" is drawn from an old Persian tradition in which the men would enter the courts of their kings wearing clothing made of paper in order to display their humility. In this sense, Ghalib implies that we stand before God in a similarly humbled (not humble) way. Another literary support to the construction of paper attire comes from the word "candidate," derived from Latin and means someone who is presenting his or her credentials wearing "white" attire.

In Ghalib's own words, this verse illustrates that the existence of man itself is the reason for his sorrow and despair. In the first line, Ghalib talks about the Universe as if it were a thoughtless creation, a careless stroke of a pen, an undesirable graffiti, wherein each "word" of that "graffiti" ponders the purpose for its creation. If the end were sorrow and grievance, then what was the need to create us? In the second line, Ghalib talks about everything in the Universe being "wrapped in paper". This draws a beautiful correlation between God's writing and God's creation of humanity — the humility of paper dress and the humility of the written word (i.e., our being) on the paper (i.e., this world) are in a sense synonymous. (Note: paper is also impermanent; writing on paper as opposed to carving on stone is displayed here as a source of its impermanence.) In the first line, there is a plea to know the cause for this injustice while the second line expresses the extreme insignificance of human existence. (In the Bible there is a famous quote that reads, "God's ways are not our ways", meaning, we cannot understand the sense of this senselessness, this suffering.) It is clear that this verse is more ironic than claiming man's position in the Universe; even while Ghalib questions, "who has done it," he leaves room for us to ponder that perhaps it was God?

kavkav-e sakht jani hai tanhai, na(h) puchh
subh karna sham ka, lana hai ju-e shir ka

Inquire not of my forebearance to the incessant hammering in the loneliness.
Turning night into day is like unearthing a channel of milk.

[kavkav: continuous beating of hard stone with a sharp object; sakht jani hai: ability to bear extreme agony—expressed as surviving the state of extreme commotion and agitation; ju-e shir: channel of milk. (Referring to the legendary lover farhad's digging the channel of milk out of the mountain for King Khusrao, as a condition of having his wife, Shirin. ]

The deeply inflicted pain of being away from the beloved, spending lonely nights without her, is no less formidable than digging out a channel of milk, as the legendary hero, Farhad did. The poet asserts that in the path of love, one has to be just as dedicated, tough, and forbearing. While Farhad did this only once, the poet suffers daily, belittling the efforts of the legendary lover and magnifying the pain of the nights of separation. Here, Ghalib compares the intensity of his passion and desire with the legendary lover, Farhad. In this way, he implies that the severity of his pain is on par with the intensity of the lover's. While the pain of Farhad's work was physical, the poet's agony is mental or spiritual in nature. In both instances, however, extreme resilience is needed to survive. Note how the poet makes a play on words using continuous tapping as if with a sharp object. It is almost like the mountain digger was digging, hardening the heart like a callous by the tapping.

jazb'a(h)-e be ikhtiar-e shauq dekha chahiye
sin'a(h)-e shamshir se bahar hai dam shamshir ka

Worth seeing is the spirit of my uncontrollable desire,
Causing the edge of the sword to unfurl from its sheath.

[dam: breath; dam-e shamshir: edge of sword.]

My desire to sacrifice myself is so intense that the sword edge has come out of its casing. The sword finds me so ripe for sacrifice that it cannot control itself to grant me my wish. The expulsion of breath further symbolizes an expression of extreme desire to act.

agahi dam-e shanidan jis qadar chdhe bichhae
muddaa unqa hai apne 'alam-e taqrir ka

No matter how awareness spreads its nets of hearing,
The meaning is the nonexistent bird in the style of my expression.

[agahi: awareness; dam: net; shanidan: to hear, listen, or attend to; muddaa: whatever is meant; unqa: legendary bird that does not exist (ala Unicorn). ]

No matter how hard one tries to understand Ghalib's verses, they shall remain unfathomable; trying to understand them is like catching a bird that does not exist. The net of reasoning and intelligence cannot catch my thoughts. Ghalib was oft blamed for adducing complex thoughts. He openly admits that it is difficult, even for a genius, to understand the true meaning of his verses.

baske hun Ghalib asiri men bhi atish zer pa
mue atish dida(h) hai halqa(h) meri zanjir ka

Whereas, even in bondage, there is fire under my feet, Ghalib,
The chains that bind me are merely curls of singed hair.

[baske: whereas; atish zer pa: impatient, cinders (fire) under feet; mue atish: heat-damaged hair (not burned), hair, singed, fragile; halqa(h): ring.]

O' Ghalib, even in bondage I am so impassioned that the links of the chain tying me down are like curls of singed, fragile hair. The complexity of the verse depends on "fire" and "singed hair." Having reached my ultimate desire of surrendering to you, I am impatient for the pain of suffering. The heat of my desire and passion has weakened the rings of the chain, allowing me imminent freedom to begin suffering this pain again. The images of fire beneath the feet (an illustration of impatience and passion) and the curls of damaged hair (not burned) so close to "fire" are remarkable. Impatience, bondage, chain-links, fire, singed hair — all parts of a very complex visualization. The personality of the lover who does not long for bondage, who is a free soul, is eloquently expressed here.

By Mirza Ghalib
Translated by: Dr Sarfaraz K. Niazi

Movie Review-Dhamaal

Dhamaal- AVOID at all costs !

A mish mash of scenes copied from Johnny English, Mr.Bean, Road Trip and a whole lot of other movies makes Dhamaal watchable only for purposes of sheer trivia...and the name of the game is Guess the Original!

A story that takes ages to be introduced, some painful acting by Javed Jaffrey in a Bean-esque role, some more overacting by all the others, painful music by Adnan Sami, jokes that were two decades old with no punchlines,a landlady whose Punjabi accent disappears in half a scene..I cannot go on...a crap-all of the worst kind..it was so enervating that I decided to walk out mid way, despite having thought earlier that I should wait until the interval, and give it a chance to improve...

Please do watch the movie if -
i) you have nothing better to do
ii) and it is on TV.

Do not waste time and money on it, if you have seen the others..given that my friends and I were the only people not laughing in the hall, I would solely blame our over-exposure to Hollywood as the reason why we could see the originals before the jokes were delivered.

Its a labour even writing a review of such a bad movie...I quit !

and this is what the batch had to say in reply !

BATCHSPEAK

What do we say about a person who is creating a BCG matrix for the yearbook??? The ***HUMAN GOOGLE** of our NMIMS, his fundaas and logics will leave many a spellbound. Self proclaimed PJ king of the batch, in reality his jokes can stop laughter. Future author of the book “1000 things NOT to do when talking to girls.” Is actually a test subject for the research “Things not to eat when boozing”. Can puke at will. Many auto drivers between college and his residence will vouch for it. An extremely knowledgeable person, a fantastic confidant, he is also the quintessential over-enthu guy, also a slogger who works real hard. His uncanny knack to strive under pressure always brings out the best in him. He has the gumption to triumph over his adversities and come out stronger. A nice and a genuine person to know and a friend for keeps.He came, he tried and he changed. Himself, is what we mean here. He worked, then he wanted to work, and finally he learnt..

MBA ke side effects !

This was something that I created for the year book, but it was not selected due to "space constraints"..so here it is , for the rest of the world to admire ! :P

PS: The anthem here refers to that great musical composition called the NMIMS anthem !

On Eklavya..

Eklavya, by Mr.Vidhu Vinod Chopra, is perhaps a movie ahead of its time. The movie explores the concept of "Dharma" , using the legend of Eklavya as an underlying theme.

In the original version, the young archer chops off the thumb of his right hand as Gurudakshina, thus ensuring Arjun's place at the top in the Archery Hall of Fame. To put it in the words of the royal guard, played by Mr.Bachchan - "Khoon bhi nikla, dard bhi hua".

The movie begins with Mr.Bachchan narrating this story to a young Saif, who questions the logic behind Eklavya's decision, and maintains that he should have given the finger to Dronacharya..though not quite literally !

The movie then goes on to tell the audience that Saif ( Prince Harshvardhan) and Raima Sen (Nandini), who plays his sister, were actually fathered by Eklavya, and not Sharmila Tagore's(the queen) husband, Boman Irani(Rana). This fact has been haunting the impotent Rana's existence since a while, and it manifests itself finally on the queen's ( sharmila's) deathbead, when he throttles her. Sharmila's constant recollection of Eklavya during her ailment is actually the trigger that lights the fuse to his explosive temper. After all, the poor man was trying to read her a Shakespeare sonnet, while she was going on and on about Eklyava !!

Saif learns the truth about his parentage in a letter from his mother. One of the sentences in the letter talks about using your intelligence to determine what Dharma actually is. This is the cue that teasingly suggests the actual implications of the movie.

The movie then takes off and shows the dilemmas faced by Saif and how he interprets his Dharma and fulfils the promise made to his mother, and how his interpretation is at odds with the one pursued by his father, Eklavya, who believes in the Dharma assigned to him on the death of his father. The last few scenes of the movie - the Saif and Mr.Bachchan encounter- superbly highlights the conflict between the two perspectives.

The plot at first may seem to be a trifle too simple, and one may feel that it was not worth such an effort, but the truth as I made it out to be, was that Eklavya actually illustrates this dilemma quite beautifully. At its heart is the conflict between ideology and pragmatism - the dilemma of doing what is said to be "right/correct" and what one may judge/feel to be right given the context of the situation- and the choice of using Eklavya as a particular metaphor to highlight this struggle is an inspired choice. Mr. Chopra is of course, a master of the visual art, and the movie has been shot in a poetically beautiful manner.

The best thing about the movie that I found out was that it grew upon me. I hated it when in the hall, but after I went back home and actually thought hard about what the movie was all about, I was floored ! It was like a slow acting drink...and the high was so amazing that I still am trying to get over it !

I would not recommend this film to people in the age group of 15-25, simply because the nuances are so many and so delicate, that they may not be fully appreciated by them. Also, if you expect to see a movie of a typical Bachchan performance, then you will be disappointed..so please avoid. However, if you are in the mood for some serious thinking, then the movie will be a virtual all you can eat food for thought banquet ! Yes, you may end up feeling that the actors were not actually made to deliver their full potential, but the restraint in the performances is probably one that is demanded for by the script itself, so not much fault can be found there too.

Hats off to Mr.Chopra ! This is surely a movie that I will see more than than once !