"Afternoon" tea at Harrods

Feb 22^nd was the fifth anniversary of our second wedding (yes, Anita and I have got married twice – five months apart – long story; for some other time). We had planned to go away for the weekend but come 22^nd Feb we felt that we should do something together. I had a quiz scheduled for 8.30 so I suggested we meet somewhere for coffee post work. Anita suggested “why not go to the coffee shop at Harrods?” I had heard good things about the Harrod’s café and so it was a date for around 6.30 pm.

I reached Harrods at around 6.20 and walked in. A security guard accosted me and said “your bag, sir”. I took it off my shoulder and offered it to him but no, he had no desire to see the bag or inspect its innards. He just wanted to make sure that I did not carry it on my back but wanted me to hold it in my hand by its top and move around as if I was clasping a briefcase. I am not sure how that made it safer in any way but his wish was my command.

I moved over to one of the ladies at the ubiquitous perfume counters and asked her where the coffee shop was. She asked me to go straight past two sections, turn left and go past one section. When I reached there, I realized I had been guilty of less than clear communication. I had reached the aisle where coffee beans were being sold! And they were selling all varieties of beans there - Brazilian, Indian, Sumatran – you name it. There was also a sushi area there as well as meat in other corners of the room but people were not allowed to eat or drink anything there- probably just as well.

Just then I got a text from Anita saying that she was at the Harrod’s café on the second floor. I went up and asked one of the floor assistants which way the café was. I was told “round the corner there, sir…but you may find that they won’t entertain you anymore”. Now, I knew that Harrods had a dress code (they have refused entry to people wearing scouts uniforms and people in army dress) but I was coming from office. Admitted that I wasn’t wearing a tie but surely that was carrying things a bit far. Anyway, I went over towards the café but even as I was reaching I got another text from Anita saying that she was at Café Florian on the 3^rd Floor. The plot was thickening!

Anyway, I went over to the third floor – the café wasn’t really a separate enclosed area - it was just cordoned off from the main floor and hence not a separate area. Anita was already seated at practically the first table as one got in and I joined her. I asked her why she didn’t go to the second floor but she told me that the café on the second floor shut at 6 pm. That explained the floor assistant’s comments. I then asked her why she was sitting practically at the entrance. The following conversation ensued

“You don’t get a choice, you sit where they ask you to sit.”

“Still, you could have asked for someplace inside.”

“Those areas are already closed off (aside- to be fair the inside half was completely empty) and in any case aukad dekhke seat dete hai.” (this last said pointing at me)

“What do you mean aukad? What’s wrong with what I am wearing – it’s a Raymond suit!” (this in a slightly bristing manner)

“But what about the evening standard poking out of your coat pocket – that too half read with its pages dog eared and half torn.”

So, I quickly got rid of that behind the seat and sat down.

Now we had to decide what to order – since neither of us was very hungry we decided to have something light. Anita chose the evening tea which came with scones, clotted cream, jam, pastries and finger sandwiches. I went for a hot chocolate while sharing the other stuff.

We realized as we were waiting for the order to be placed that there were two types of music – one playing within the café and one playing out on the shopfloor. Weird but the fusion seemed to work fairly decently.

The whole place looked very grand and it seemed weird to be waiting for sandwiches in a place like that- it’s like going to the Taj Mahal and then ordering pani puri from a local thelawala (well, perhaps some of you have done that but you get the point).

But then the food came and we realized that this wasn’t just any pani puri; it was pani puri with mineral water – nay, indeed Evian water. Everything came in what looked at least like silverware. The knives and forks were silver plated. The pastries and sandwiches came in this double deckered bower (silver). The clotted cream was in a separate bowl and there were three good sized jars of jam -fig, strawberry and black cherries- though I was appalled to realize that the jars were glass and not silver!

Let me at the outset say that the food was excellent – except for one of the pastries everything was brilliant. And the quantity was very considerable for an afternoon tea for one person. No wonder UK is the most obese nation in Europe – if that is what they are going to have for tea everyday there’s no doubt where their waistline is going.

Three jars of jam were never going to be finished by us, so I suggested to Anita that we could ask for it to be packed – after all, we were short of jam at home. If looks could kill!!!!

The scones were very rich and so was the hot chocolate, so I soon needed some water. Anita however was not very impressed with the idea –“when he says ‘still or sparkling’ you can’t say ‘tap’ – not in a place like this.” I didn’t agree with her but when she pointed at the evening standard and mouthed the word aukad once again , to prove a point I said “okay, we will go for still”. To be honest, the chocolate and the scones were so rich, I really needed the water and would have happily paid for it.

We called the waiter over and asked for some water. He said “still, sir?” and then with the most imperceptible of pauses, the type where one knows there is a pause but can’t quite pin point where exactly it occurred, he added “…or would tap water do?”. I nonchalantly nodded and said “Tap water would be fine…but if you could just could get it a bit quickly” as if it was only the speed which I was concerned with- if he could get Evian in a second then that would be the best.

After he left to get the water, I turned back to Anita and was about to say – “see, there‘s a legal requirement to give tap water and Harrods is unlikely to go against the law” but before I could get all that in she went for the kill – “see Sancho, he fully understood your aukad .” I reminded Anita that she was sitting along with me and indeed, it was to her that he had given the seat near the entrance. “Yes, but it was you whom he asked about the tap water.” Touche!

Anyway, the water turned up and by then we had got through most of the food. We asked for the bill and it came along in a while. Not bad at all. It was getting to be time for the quiz so we moved on quickly. As we stepped out of the café onto the shop floor we came to an area of chandeliers which were on sale. I pointed out one to Anita and told her “On sale- only eleven fifty.” With a very surprised look she went closer to look at the chandelier. Then she suddenly turned to me with an irritated look and said “I thought you meant eleven pounds fifty!” Come on, it is Harrods!

So, that was our evening at Harrods – all in all a lovely experience. We probably need to go back before six to visit the Harrod’s café as well.

Top Song Picturizations

Feb 23rd is the seventh death anniversary of Vijay Anand. Both a fine actor and an excellent director, he is extremely well known for his song picturizations. As a tribute I decided to make my own list of the top song picturizations from Hindi films across time.

The question arises “what defines great picturization”. Does it have to be grand? Does it need to have a hundred chorus dancers along? Do the actual music/singing have to be extremely memorable? What are the parameters being used to decide this list? To be honest, there are no defined parameters. It’s just a song which one sees and then reacts positively. I realize that that is vague but to be honest, I haven’t used any other parameters. As you read through the list you will see that there probably isn’t anything common in these songs.

The list has been decided without actually looking at the songs themselves. The logic was that if the picturization was so great then it should have left an impression- I realize that it is a debatable piece of logic- so the basic list and the descriptions which follow are largely from memory. I had initially shortlisted a dozen or songs and written about them, but when actually appending the You tube videos I did see them all and pruned it down to 10. In some cases, there might have been minor modifications in the write-ups but nothing major.

As usual, the “another time, another place” caveat applies. So, here’s the list – in chronological order

1. Drum Dance (Chandralekha, 1948)

In 1988, to celebrate 75 years of Indian cinema, DD showed a retrospective of 12 films from 4 film makers over 12 days– Guru Dutt, Raj Kapoor , Ritwick Ghatak, and S S Vasan. I wasn’t too interested in seeing the movies of Ghatak and Vasan. But I did stay awake (the movies were being shown at 11 pm – which for 1988 was very very late) to see “Chandralekha” by S S Vasan – primarily because one of the leads Ranjan, was a childhood friend of my maternal grandmother – apparently they used to play together as kids. I don’t remember much of the film but I do remember this scene.

To be fair, this is not really a song but just a dance sequence - but what a dance sequence it is! It is a Trojan horse sort of situation where the drums actually have warriors within them. The dance is followed by, what I believe, is the longest sword fight in film history, once the warriors pour out of the drums.

But that’s going ahead- just see the dance itself – it is amazing choreography and even now- 60 years later- the grandeur of the song is enough to put it in my all time top list.



2. Waqt ne kiya kya haseen sitam (Kaghaz ke phool, 1959)

It’s difficult to describe in words this song because nothing much happens. Two people are standing and they do not say a word or move much during the song. The song plays completely in background and the camera keeps moving between them. But the song is a director’s vision and a cinematographer’s delight. The use of light and dark and the movements of the camera make this a highly memorable song. Definitely worth a watch.



3. Sheesh Mahal scene -Pyar kiya to darna kya (Mughal-e-azam, 1960)

This is, perhaps the finest song ever picturized in Hindi films. The entire scene is awe inspiring and the movie can be seen just for this song (even if the rest of it happened to be useless- which, by any stretch of imagination, it wasn’t!)

Everything about this song was perfect. The view of the sheesh mahal, when Lata sings “chaaron taraf hai unka nazara” is to be seen to be believed. Also impressive are the facial reactions of everyone during the song. This is probably Madhubala’s finest performance – and her expressions, when she dances in front of Dilp Kumar (unki tamanna dil me rahegi, shamma isi mehfil me rahegi) and then offers the knife to Prithviraj Kapoor (ishq me jeena, ishq me marna, aur hame hai karna kya) are perfect. The reactions of Prithviraj Kapoor, as an emperor whose wishes are being set aside, show his anger and frustration so well. Even Durga Khote as Jodha bai and Nigar Sultana as Bahaar, I thought emote brilliantly, with no words – clearly embarrassed to be there when the emperor is being disregarded and completely unsure of how he would react. The weak point in this song, surprisingly, is Dilip Kumar, who does not leave much of an impression.



But the sheesh mahal scene is more than just this song – there are a few minutes of dialogue after that which are just as compelling. Just consider the dialogue between Akbar and Anarkali in isolation -

“Ye teri bekhauf raqs, ye dilchasp andaz-e-bayan, yakeenan hamare inaam ke mustahaq hain”
“Zah-e-naseeb. Zill-e-ilahi ki faraaq dili se kaneez ko yahi umeed thi”

Just see these 2 lines in complete isolation and even then there is no doubt of the real meaning and emotion behind these 2 lines – the immense irony in both the statements –so well has it has been acted.

The scene between Akbar and Salim post Anarkali’s arrest is equally brilliant with the conflict between the father and the emperor so well shown. After Akbar asks for isolation, Salim stays back for this dialogue to ensue

“tumhari maujodgi nafarmani ki daleel hai”
“Anarkali ko bandi bana diya gaya…aur main dekhta raha”
“aur tum kar bhi kya sakte the” (only an emperor can say that, not a father)



Enough said - watch Mughal-e-azam!!! That’s all that’s left to say.

4. Tere Ghar ke saamne (Tere Ghar ke saamne, 1962)

The title song of Tere ghar ke saamne is one of the cutest songs I have seen. The dream sequence was not a new device (Raj Kapoor having introduced it in Awara in 1951) but this made very good use it. The idea of Nutan inside the wine glass and Dev Anand outside it, singing to each other is terrific. And when you consider the fact that they must have shot independently for the song, their reactions are near perfect. Note the shot where Dev Anand hits the glass with his finger and Nutan reacts as if her nose has been hit.

But the “coolest” bit of the song is when the ice cube is put into the drink and Nutan’s reaction to that. A piece of cinematic beauty! Top Song and Top picturization.



5. Daiya ye main kahan aa phansi (Caravan, 1971)

As song situations go this is one of the stock Hindi film ones- indeed, very trite. The hero and the heroine are running away from the bad guys and suddenly stumble onto the stage of some performance. And as is to be expected they have to sing and dance on stage.

However, unlike all such situations, they do not turn out to be great dancers and flawless singers (though, to be fair, by the end of it, you realize that Asha Bhosle’s voice is very good). In fact, they turn out to be bumbling nincompoops, which is what makes this song special.

This song is perhaps the original precursor to the Jeetendra PT dances of the 80’s but the context makes it perfect. To honour the cabaret, the song also has a mini strip tease (but very proper, to fit to Hindi film standards) which again fits in very well (remember this is the film which also had Piya tu ab to aaja, one of the all time great cabarets in Indian cinema). Overall, the song does amuse and, to my mind, has high recall value.

Incidentally, Asha Parekh is on record that this song was the toughest she ever shot. Her point was that for a highly trained dancer like her to knowingly get all her steps wrong and generally mess up while making it look normal was very difficult. But I think she did a terrific job and looks very natural.



6. Ek haseena thi (Karz, 1980)

A stage song, which I feel was very well choreographed. The way the story moves is very well handled and the way the camera moves from stage to Simi’s face and back is also managed well . Rishi Kapoor’s look towards the end of the song when Tina Munim twirls from arm to arm (and Simi keeps seeing Raj Kiran and Rishi Kapoor alternately) is also perfect. I find it difficult to pin point one thing in the song but the overall effect is quite excellent.



7. Dil hai chota sa (Roja, 1992)

Again, I find it difficult to pinpoint one specific thing in the song but the overall effect is very nice. The beauty of carefree youth is very well shown and the cinematography is top class.

There are other songs similar to this but this one stays in my mind- so it makes my list.



8. Hamma (Bombay, 1994)

This was a song which was the rage of its time. People had already heard it innumerable times on the radio by the time the film released but I don’t actually remember seeing a visual trailer of the song till actually seeing the film. I am not sure if that was a conscious decision by the film makers or just me not watching enough TV at that time.

But it is a lovely song- the contrasting shots between the dance floor with Sonali Bendre and the bedroom with Manisha Koirala and Arvind Swamy surprisingly gel extremely well. I don’t remember the details well enough to point out specifics but the antics (can’t think of another word) of Manisha Koirala and her embarrassment at being able to perform such antics are lovely.



9. Chainya chainya (Dil se, 1999)

When I described pyar kiya to darna kya as “perhaps the finest song ever picturized in Hindi films”, the only reason for the use of the word “perhaps” is this song. It’s a complete tour –de-force of a picturization. The setting, the entourage, the synchronization – everything is near perfect.

The choreography is mind boggling- the sheer energy of everyone in the dance is almost infectious. Malaika Arora looks gorgeous but even she is overshadowed by the entire setting. And even Shahrukh Khan dances quite well!

And to round it off, how much better can you get than a line which says –ho jiski zuban urdu ki tarah. Poetry – both visually and aurally.



10. Wo Ladki hai kahan (Dil chahta hai, 2003)

I think it’s the mix of various things in the song which I like so much – the sepia tinted film shots, the old style car shots, the bird flapping, the spoof on hindi film dance sequences. They all combine together so perfectly to make a highly memorable song.




So, that’s my list. A lot of Mani Ratnam and surprising (to me) that there’s no song of Helen. Maybe that calls for a separate post another time!

Silence!

Right, so don't ask me why I did this - it was just something which crossed my mind. I finished my Metro quite quickly in the tube this morning and had some time to kill. I don't know why the thought of silent letters came to me but i started to list down examples of silent letters -one word for each letter. As a rule I assumed vowel sequences which form a single vowel sound to have no silent letters (so, words like break, bread, field, etc are assumed to have no silent letters). Similarly, doubled consonants (dull, rotten, egg, etc) or standard consonant sequences where the sound cannot be attributed to a letter (sc-, th-, sh-, etc) are also not considered silent.

Couldn't complete the alphabet but here goes

A - Momentary

B - Debt

C - Worcester

D - Wednesday

E - Name

F - Halfpenny

G- Sing

H- Honest

I - Business

J - Marijuana (?)

K - Knot

L - Calm

M- Mnemonic

N- Solemn

O - Offertory

P - Psalm

Q - ?

R - Farm (true in RP English and other non rhotic forms)

S - Island

T - Whistle

U - Vague

V - ?

W - Who

X - Borderaux

Y - Says

Z - Rendezvous


So, do help out with Q and V please.

Incidentally, I was wondering which letter is silent the most often. I don't have any data of any sort but I should assume that in non rhotic forms "r" and "e" are likely to vie for top spot followed by "g"; while in rhotic forms (since, by definition, the "r" will not be silent) "e" will almost definitely top the list followed by "g". Does anyone know of any data to answer such a question?

General cribs about English

We were having a chat in office about driving licences in the UK (I am having driving lessons right now) and at some point I mentioned something to the effect of “when you drive a bike…” and somebody said, in a very knowing tone, “you mean, ‘ride’ a bike”. I just let it go, even though I meant “drive a bike”.

It’s one of those things, which people often make a mistake about and can be irritating. So, I decided to list some of the things in the English language which people, irritatingly, get wrong.I am not referring to "malapropistic" errors (like "affect" and "effect") but other types of errors.

In some cases, usage has probably moved on, so that what I say is wrong, is perhaps now considered “disputed” or even “informal” usage. However, to my mind, these are still wrong and they still stand out for me – every time I hear any of them. So, here’s a baker’s dozen of such errors.

1. Drive vs ride

Let’s start with this, as this brought on the post. As far as meaning goes there are 2 differences between these words

i. When you drive something you must be controlling the movements of whatever it is you are driving; which is not necessary when riding something.

ii. When you ride something you must be in physical contact with whatever it is you are riding (the dictionary uses the words “in or on” to express that); which is not necessary when driving something.

There are of course, other meanings of the word (to be ridden with pain, ride the waves, driven to despair, etc) but we are focusing on things to do with locomotion.

Hence drive is defined by control whereas ride is defined by touch. Note a couple of things from this – you can drive something by remote control without physical touch and you can ride something by being in contact – so you can ride a bus merely by sitting in it. Also, consider the example of driving a herd of sheep where you may be physically be in touch with the odd sheep but since you control the movements of the entire herd, you drive the entire herd.

Usage however is slightly different and does depend on the mode of transport. A quick ready reckoner-

a. You always ride an animal, such as a horse, except in the sense above of driving a herd

b. “Ride” is generally the preferred term for a 2-wheeler. However, “drive” is by no means incorrect and is, on occasion, preferred, especially when one wants to indicate the control (“At the time of the accident, I was driving while she was riding pillion”)

c. If you are controlling the movements of a 4 wheeler, then “drive” is the only word used. If not, then “ride” is the only word which can be used.

d. Typically other modes of transport have specific words – such as fly a plane- and one does not use drive or ride for this.

2. ize vs ise

I have had people correcting me on words like “realize” saying that it is an Americanism and the British spelling is “realise”. While I am not going into the rule (which depends on Greek and Latin roots), suffice to say that “-ize” is an entirely honourable British form, much older than American English. It is the only form in American English but just about any verb ending in “-ize” can also be spelt with “-ise” in British English (an 18^th century French influence on English which did not affect American). However, in all such cases “-ize” is not just correct, it is the preferred form.

3. The plural of terminus is terminuses

Yes, and that of syllabus is syllabuses.

Words ending in “-us” can have plurals formed in 3 ways

a. “-uses” as the only correct form e.g, apparatus, prospectus, genius (meaning intelligent)

b. “-i” as the only correct form e.g., nucleus, genius (meaning spirit)

c. Both “-uses” and “-i” as correct forms e.g., syllabus, terminus, radius

Most such words fall in category c. And for this category, Fowler is very clear - the “-uses” is an English form and is hence to be preferred to the “-i” form which is a Latin form.

While we are at it, the plural of index is indexes, ditto for matrix and vertex. But radix has only radices and not radixes. The Latin versions of the plurals for all these words are not pronounced to rhyme with “spices”, instead they are pronounced to end as “e-seas”. It might just be easier to use the “-xes” form.

Finally, a plural of fish is fishes.

4. Disinterested does not mean a lack of interest

It means “devoid of any interest in the matter” – in other words, impartial or unbiased. A lack of interest is “uninterested” (slightly "malapropistic" but decided to put it in)

5. There is no time as 12 pm

Or as 12 am.

pm means post meridiem – post the midday; am means ante meridiem – before the midday. Midday itself has no such appendage. Hence it is 12 noon (or 12 midday) and 12 midnight.

Incidentally, recently I had to explain to someone the difference between 0.00 hours and 24.00 hours in a 24 hour clock – it basically refers to two different midnights, one day apart.

6. In spite of

Is three words, not two. If you want to use lesser words, use despite, just one word.

7. Exception proves the rule

Perhaps one of the widest “incorrectly used” phrases. So, what is the correct usage?

When a generalized rule is in place to which an exception exists, then the quoting of an exception to the rule is enough to show that the generalized rule exists.The existence of the exception proves the existence of the rule. If there were no rule, there would no need for stating the exception. So, a road sign saying “no parking on Saturdays” implies that parking is allowed on the other six days. One does not need to specify it.

Another example from Fowler’s - "Leave is given for men to be out of barracks tonight till 11.00 p.m."; "The exception proves the rule" means that this leave implies a rule requiring men, except when an exception is made, to be in earlier.

However, inevitably this phrase is used in a nonsensical manner. Examples from Fowler include

• "I am always punctual." "Were you on time for breakfast this morning?" "Well no, but the exception proves the rule, ha ha."

• "It will rain on my birthday, it always does." "It didn't rain last year." "But the exception proves the rule."

• It is sometimes also used to draw notice to a rarity- e.g., A rural village is "always" quiet. A local farmer rents his fields to a rock festival, which disturbs the quiet. In this example, saying "the exception proves the rule" is literally incorrect, but it is used to draw attention to the rarity of the exception.

What, to my mind is important, is that the rule is a generalized rule and not an absolute one – otherwise exceptions cannot exist. Hence a conversation going “All birds fly” “Ostriches don’t fly” “Well, the exception proves the rule” makes no sense because “all birds fly” is not a generalized rule and hence ostriches not flying disproves it. But if one flips it around and says “The Ostrich is a bird which does not fly”- that is an exception which proves the generalized rule that birds, in general, do fly. Otherwise, there would be no need to mention the fact that the Ostrich (specifically) is a bird which does not fly

Incidentally, just remember Sherlock Holmes’ famous statement – “I never make exceptions. An exception disproves the rule” (the Sign of Four). This clearly relates to absolute rules.

8. Literally

Those of you who have read the Yes Minister/Yes Prime Minister will already have come across this a number of times. When something is literal, it means that is actually true. Hence, if something has literally happened, it has actually happened. Hence, there can’t literally be smoke coming out of someone’s ears; someone’s looks cannot literally kill you and so on.

9. “This house is more larger than I expected”

Comparatives and superlatives are formed either by adding “–er” and “–est” or by using “more” and “most”. Some words do not allow the use of “–er” and “–est” (perhaps the most famous example being ‘curious’) but using “more” and “most” is always correct. However, you can’t use two comparatives together. It doesn’t form a superlative!

10. There is no such word as "supercede"

"Supersede" is the correct word.

11. “Up to” is 2 words

So, don’t write “upto” – there is no such word.

12. Dilemma

Strictly speaking, a dilemma occurs only when you have to choose between 2 options, both of which are unacceptable. Hence having to choose between “gajar ka halwa” and “rasmalai” for dessert is not a dilemma. Though, one could argue that having to decide whether you will pass on either “gajar ka halwa” or “rasmalai” is a dilemma.

This is also referred to as being “between a rock and a hard place”. Being “between Scylla and Charybdis” is a special case of a dilemma where you are stuck between two dangers, whereby reducing the risk of danger from one, increases the risk of danger from the other.

13. Second of all

There are three ways of enumeration of a list

i. First, Secondly, Thirdly

ii. First, Second, Third

iii. Firstly, Secondly, Thirdly

And which one is correct is still a highly contentious issue.

Apparently, from a purely grammatical perspective (i) is the right one. However, Fowler says that it is the pedant who starts his list with First - and instead prefers (iii). Modern usage generally stresses consistency – so go for either (ii) or (iii). I believe (ii) is more American whereas (iii) is more British, but I am not sure.

In either case, it is quite acceptable to replace either “first” or “firstly” by “first of all” to show some sort of emphasis on the primacy of the first item in a series. Using “second of all” however, makes no sense at all and is not considered correct by just about any source. I have, on occasion, even heard “third of all” – I have no comment on that at all.

So, that’s my baker’s dozen. In the future, please do try to be more correct :)