The recent weeks have been the making of Obama – the killing of the world’s most wanted terrorist followed by an Irish homecoming have made him hot property again. But in the middle of all this, he gave an interview to Andrew Marr of the BBC- an interview in which he fundamentally re wrote international diplomacy- something which perhaps has not been given enough publicity. Now, what he did in the case of Osama Bin Laden was clearly a gross violation of all international diplomacy. And yes, it was a complete decimation of Pakistan’s sovereignty. If Bin Laden had not been there in the house, it would have been an act of war on Pakistan. However, it was Bin Laden…and that meant that for the world, everything else was forgiven. Even Pakistan, which protested the violation of its sovereignty had to applaud for the killing of Bin Laden.
But in his interview with Andrew Marr, Obama said something else. He basically said that if any one posed a threat to the United States he would be okay to go after them…irrespective of where they were!! The wording was slightly vague. Here’s an excerpt from that interview
And if you find another very high value target at the top of al-Qaeda, Mullah Omar or whoever it might be in Pakistani territory or other sovereign territory, would you do the same again?
Well I've always been clear to the Pakistanis. And I'm not the first administration to say this. That our job is to secure the United States. We are very respectful of the sovereignty of Pakistan. But we cannot allow someone who is actively planning to kill our people or our our allies' people we can't allow those kind of active plans to come to fruition without us taking some action. And our hope is and our expectation is that we can achieve that in a way that is fully respectful of Pakistan's sovereignty. But I had made no secret. I had said this when I was running for the presidency, that if I had a clear shot at Bin Laden.
You'd take it.
That we'd take it.
That basically destroys the whole meaning of independent nations with respect for each other. “Our job is to secure ourselves”. Yes and war has always been an “acceptable” form of aggression between nations, once there are reasons for war. But this has basically legitimized aggression within another country even when there is no aggression against the country itself – as long as the “security” is about a country-less individual
Unfortunately, I believe Andrew Marr let Obama off the hook a bit. Marr asked about “Pakistani territory or other sovereign territory” but Obama managed to make it a answer about Pakistan – and in the current scenario it is generally acceptable that Pakistan’s sovereignty has been compromised for the killing of Bin Laden- while leaving the door open for any unilateral aggression against any country in order to “secure the United States”
The implications of that statement- especially if one is willing to interpret security in a slightly broader context , such as energy security- are mind boggling.
Not that the US has been against unilateral aggression, e.g. twenty years ago, they went in and took out President Noreiga from his presidential palace. But generally, they have always tried to build a legal case for it before the action. In this case, the attorney general has tried to build a legal case after the incident. But Obama has taken it further now by effectively eliminating a legal reason altogether and putting self interest as the only reason.
Now, of course, nations act only in their interest…and hypocrisy on legalese always exists. And yes, often might is right! But even just the need to find a legal reason for something creates a pause and makes a more measured response. And gives a chance for something else to emerge.
But Obama has now thrown that out of the window. In the new “Obama doctrine“ all that is required is for the POTUS to feel that his country’s security is at threat….and boom
Ecological Security is at threat – let’s take out BP
Job security is at threat – let’s take out Indian call centres and IT shops
Border security is at threat because of Mexico – let’s shoot all illegal immigrants coming - they are threats to our security and can be hence considered legal combatants
The price of oil is so high it is affecting our energy security – let’s invade some of the oil producing countries and give ourselves free oil
Now, I know this is absurd, but still it proves a point. Even hypocrisy has its uses. Such blatant disregard for established diplomatic procedures- and clearly enunciating this disregard is dangerous. And with the US remaining the clear superpower for some time to come it could signal an intention of “do what I say, or else.” Alas, the US does not seem to want other nations, in dealing with them, to have any more choice than Bernard Woolley did when he told Hacker –“your wish is my cooperation”
Amazon has announced that it now has more ebook downloads than actual book sales. The actual statement they made was "Amazon.com is now selling more Kindle books than paperback books. Since the beginning of the year, for every 100 paperback books Amazon has sold, the company has sold 115 Kindle books. Additionally, during this same time period the company has sold three times as many Kindle books as hardcover books.” Now, there is a slight bit of sophistry, because it means that for every 115 kindle ebooks sold, there are 138 physical books which Amazon has sold. And, i am not sure if this includes marketplace sales or not which i believe is 30% of all amazon sales (though this is not just books, but extrapolating that...) Which means another 108 books sold which are all likely to be physical. So, the real numbers are more like 115 ebooks to 246 physical books, making less than a third of all sales being electronic.
However, whatever I might prove with these numbers, the reality is that the e-book industry is only going to grow. And I am perhaps a bit old fashioned in still wanting to retain the physical book. There is a certain joy in holding a book in your hand and bending the pages which I believe cannot be matched. There is a joy in rummaging through a stack of old books and finding something you have been looking for which a Google search cannot replace.
I remember how kicked I was to find T.S Elliot’s “Old Possum's Book of Practical Cats” in an old road somewhere within Bricklane a year ago; and how I absolutely loved reading about Mungojerrie and Griddlebone (those of you who have read Macavity will know what i am talking about)- twenty years after I first wanted to. And it’s why i almost always visit Manney’s everytime I am back in Pune and have always visited the Strand book festival when I was in Bombay. Unfortunately, I have had no chance of going to the Calcutta book festival...but someday.
I do realize that it is an old fashioned view. Google search does have its advantages. I was able to find “And yet I don’t know”, a poem which Riyaz Bharucha, a senior at school had recited at our elocution contest on August 15th, 1989. I can still remember him going “and yet i don’t know and yet i don’t know...”. And it was because of search I was able to find this gem again. And yes, I did read it online...and it was fabulous.
But then, it was a one page poem, not a book! How can one read 200 pages electronically! I don’t know and as long as physical books are so easily available, do i really need to find out? Many years ago, I installed Microsoft Reader on my work PC and read a lot of stuff on it but it just didn’t seem right. Maybe the kindle is different...but i am sceptical – sceptical enough not to spend the £150 for it.
So, as a via media, I have today downloaded Kindle for Android on my HTC. Read a few of Aesop’s fables on it and I must admit it was not a great feeling. Perhaps I need to read more...and I shall try. Admittedly, it is sub optimal but worth a try. However, I am not complacent of an imminent change in consumer behaviour. Let’s see. Maybe it will need Graphene to drive that change.
But I am sure many of you have already changed your behaviour and I would love to hear from you on how easy you found the transition.
Just to round off on a different note, while the announcement of more ebook sales than physical sales is a momentous one, I read a small article in City AM which is perhaps equally momentous – I believe China now consumes more gold than India. And India has been knocked off its top perch after god knows how long. The year still has some time to go, so I would urge all of you in India – go out and buy gold...you have a national duty to do so now :)
Some weeks ago I had listed what I had thought were the finest song picturizations in Hindi film history. I suppose the logical next step is to look at the top songs itself.
However, choosing just ten songs is really difficult. A way out of it is to make slots and fit things into those slots. The Hindi film industry began in 1931 and we are in 2011, 80 years hence. I have decided to choose one song from each decade, giving 8 in all and then adding 2 more songs from the 1950-1970 period. Those twenty years have been chosen as I believe that they are perhaps the finest period in Hindi film music .
So, these 10 probably wouldn’t be my top ten songs but they do cover the spectrum of Hindi film songs across time. As usual, “another time, another place” applies to these as well.
So, here goes
1930’s
I have actually heard perhaps the least amount of music from this decade. So, it is quite difficult to choose one song. I hardly know of a handful of songs from this period so any choice is limiting. I am greatly tempted to go with “In the world’s broadfield of battle” sung by Shanta Apte in Duniya na mane (1937). But I realize that a part of that decision is being influenced by the fact that it is perhaps the first English song in a Hindi film.
So, I am finally going to go with a very famous song, one which Saigal refused to give playback for and insisted that it be recorded live because that would be the only way to get the sentiment right. Thus Saigal 'walked the streets' singing, with the entire orchestra following him out of the camera's reach. The result was magic. The song has been sung by singers through time but there is still something in Saigal’s rendition which is touching. And of course, Wajid Ali Shah’s lyrics are also very moving- with a poem which operates at two levels - wedding and death. I give you – Babul Mora (Street Singer, 1937)
1940’s
Finally, this proved to be the most difficult decade for me to decide on one song. From the second half of this decade is when I have heard hindi film music. There is a lot of good stuff as singers like Lata, Geeta Dutt, Rafi, Mukesh, Talat, Suraiya all began in this decade as did music directors like Naushad, SJ, C Ramchandra. And of course Saigal, Noor Jehan, Anil Biswas all remained very prolific in this decade.
Finally, I have gone for a song towards the end of the decade – a song which still defines Mohammed Rafi and is one of the earliest examples of the Rafi- Naushad-Shakeel combination working magic. It isn’t picturized on Dilip Kumar though – thankfully, because it a highly boring picturization. I remember when I first saw this song, sometime in the 80’s or 90’s in a Chitrahaar, I was so disappointed at how stupid it looked. But it can’t take away from Rafi’s superlative singing- slow, sentimental and finally out of the Saigal shadow. So, when you listen to listen to this online, close your eyes and just listen – Suhani Raat dhal chuki (Dulari- 1949)
1950’s and 1960’s
I had anticipated that this period would be the most difficult for me to decide. That’s why I decided to have 4 songs from this 20 year period. But it wasn’t so bad. I am surprised that finally I did not pick up a song from Chori Chori or indeed any song of either SJ or Naushad. But actually, for me 2 songs almost picked themselves – indeed, if I had to choose only one song from the 50’s and one from the 60’s it would have been really difficult (as these 2 songs are from 1960 and 1966). But the cushion of 4 songs allowed to me to pick them both and then think about the other two. That was difficult, though finally I did choose 2 songs…but highly debatable, even in my mind.
Ye raat ye chandni, Jaal- 1952
There are 2 versions of this song- there is a duet with Lata and Hemant but I am going with the solo by Hemant Kumar. This is Sachin Dev Burman at his best and the music between the stanzas is truly haunting; as is the “hmmhmmhmm” by Hemant Kumar (is this his best Hindi film song?)
While not directly a factor of the song, adding to its effect is the picturization by Guru Dutt and due credit to the cinematographer who makes it even more ethereal.See the moving leaves at the beginning, the waves, the coconut trees…and of course, this song cannot be thought of without mentioning Geeta Bali- not a word does she say but her expressions just add to the mystique of this song.
Again there are 2 versions of this song- one by Lata but I am going with the one by Hemant Kumar and chorus.
For me, this version is Vande Mataram- not the radio one so many of us grew up with, not the A.R. Rahman “maa tujhe salaam” but this one. A song which was meant to fire up all the revolutionaries should be something like this. Just listening to this makes you feel charged up.
This version uses a longer version of the poem than that which we are used to – some four odd stanzas, some of which many of us would have not heard. And it is so powerful just to feel the energy coursing- even if one doesn’t understand much of what is being sung. For a transliteration and translation of the complete poem (longer than this song) look here.
Na to karavan ki talash hai, Barsaat ki raat, 1960
Hindi films have always used qawwalis well;though to be fair, while they mostly retain the form of the qawwali, by far the majority of them do not stay true to the original devotional aspect of qawwalis. Be that as it may, from the famous “aahen na bhari” of Zeenat (1945) right up to “khwaja mere khwaja” in Jodha Akbar (2008), there have been some excellent qawwalis. None probably has been better than this one from Barsaat ki raat – a film which incidentally has two other very fine qawallis – nigah-e-naaz ke maaron ka haal, and ji chahta hai choom loon. But na to karavan is the supreme one.
The complete song is about 12 min long and is intoxicating. Starting off slowly, it builds up gradually and the tempo keeps on rising and rising. And by the time one reaches the line “inteha ye hai ke bande ko khuda karta hai ishq” at the end, one is just lost in the song and really forgotten everything else. This is not a song I can describe; it is an experience one has to undergo by listening to it.
Mere dushman tu meri dosti, Aaye din bahaar ke, 1966
A unique choice, in that it’s not the music or the singing or the orchestration that makes this a great song- it’s the lyrics. There are many songs with fine lyrics but only a handful where the lyrics can be the difference which take an otherwise ordinary, normal song and transform it into a brilliant one. Mere dushman is a prime example of that.
But this song is different.I do not think I have ever come across a better exposition of hatred than in this song. If one has to answer the question “how much can one hate someone”, I think a pretty good limit on that would be set by the emotions expressed in this song. The tune and the actual singing are quite immaterial in this case- just the words are breath taking. And when I say “breath taking”, I don’t mean in the sense of “oh, what a beautiful view. It takes my breath away”, but more the sharp intake of breath one has when one is humiliated or shouted at. The strength of negativity described by these words is scary and dark. Just listen to the words and to read the (slightly incorrect and incomplete) lyrics go here
1970’s
With the decline of Rafi and the emergence of Kishore in this decade, it is perhaps not surprising that I am going for a song with Kishore kumar in it. Equally, with Asha Bhonsle becoming the more prolific of the sisters, not too surprising that she appears as the female voice in this duet.
The distinctive feature of this song is the abrupt shifts from high pitch to low pitch and vice versa which the 2 singers alternate between. The effect is magical – especially Asha Bhonsle at the low end of the scale. Her voice in this song at that pitch sounds, in my opinion, quite unlike anything else she has ever sung. Unfortunately for Kishore, though he has also sung this song exceptionally well (and it is a difficult song to sing) the distinctive memory for me is Asha Bhonsle…at low pitch. Jaane ja dhundhta fir raha (Jawani diwani – 1972)
1980’s
Perhaps the worst decade as far as Hindi film music goes. Part of the reason was the absolutely rubbish lyrics which started happening in this decade. Hence, it is perhaps appropriate to consider that when R.D. Burman was given the lyrics for this song his first reaction was "Huh, kal tu Times Of India le aayega aur bolega iski tune bana. Metre betre aata to hai nahin tujhe.”
At the same time, ironically, this is one of the more beautiful pieces of poetry one has come across in Hindi films and to that extent the anti thesis of a lot of music of the 80’s. And again Asha Bhonsle voice is silken.
What I really like about the song is the ending – I always feel it’s a bit abrupt but fits in very well with the general way of this song. Mera kuch saaman (Ijazat -1989)
1990’s
Absolutely no debate for me here- there’s only one song which could be selected here. Has there ever been a finer description of a beautiful girl than this. Perhaps “Chaudhvin ka Chand” comes close…but honestly the gap is quite wide. Even when I think of English poetry, say “She walks in beauty” or “Shall I compare thee to a summer’s day”, I feel this poem can stand up to them and be considered one of the finest examples of a collection of similes in such a short piece of work.
Of course, the other thing about this song is that it does not just depend on its lyrics- however brilliant they are. The music is melodious and this song forgives Kumar Sanu anything else he might have sung in his life (not that he hasn’t sung some good stuff; but after this it is quite immaterial). And rarely has Manisha Koirala looked more beautiful than in this song- Ek ladki ko dekha (1942, A love story – 1994).
2000’s
Just as qawwali’s have been a staple in hindi films, so have been item numbers – indeed even more so. The term “item number” is probably from the 90’s but item numbers have been around forever. Helen sustained an entire career over more than 20 years as effectively an “item number girl” – which unfortunately does not do enough justice to her acting skills (but that’s another story) and before her there was Cuckoo who was the “cabaret” girl of the 40’s and 50’s. And of course the “mujra” song has been a staple in Hindi films.
So, in a way, it is fitting that one rounds up with this list with an item number featuring the biggest star ever in Indian films along with his son and future daughter-in-law.
I love this song – it’s highly infectious, very zestful and has very nice lyrics. There really isn’t much to write specifically about the song. I just like it a lot! Kajra re kajra re (Bunty aur Babli – 2005)
So, the IPL is about half way through and as usual it’s been the usual complement of sixes and some outrageous shots, an unknown Indian batsman suddenly making his name, and some general tamasha.
I must admit that I watch IPL on occasion but I am not a great fan. I don’t follow it and don’t really know what’s going on in the points table. But this is not really something to do with the IPL but a general reaction to T-20 cricket. I do not really relate to it and can’t really appreciate it.
Of course, I realize this is a slightly old fashioned way of looking at things. I am sure there will be some of you who will be saying that this is exactly how people reacted forty years ago when one day cricket was introduced. And there is more than a grain of truth in that. I am certainly a person who grew up with test and one day cricket and that certainly reflects in my views.
However, I feel there is a bit more than that. The basic premise of cricket is that is a game between bat and ball. That did change a bit with the introduction of one day cricket but I believe it remained largely true – even over the last ten years or so, administrators have tried more and more to tilt it towards batsmen. But with T-20 it is unabashedly all about batsmen. So, the game is no more about bat vs ball but about batsmen of team 1 versus the batsmen of team 2. The bowlers have been reduced to the status of ball boys in tennis - can’t really have the game move smoothly without them but really have no attention focused on them.
And that makes the game boring to me. I feel the balance needs to be adjusted back towards the bowlers a bit. And with that in mind, I have a few suggestions which I believe can help a bit.
Consider imposing a weight limit on bats. Bats have become so thick it’s not funny anymore - the weight of the ball has not changed for ever and ever but bats have gone through the roof…and the sweets spots become bigger and bigger so that even a touch goes for a six. Let’s limit that.
Increase the ground sizes. Administrators seem to have a penchant for bringing in the ropes – whether to seat more people or just to have a shorter boundary, I don’t know. But you have the ridiculous situation of some boundaries being less than 60m. When conflated with the better bats it just means that mis hits go for six, which is plain unfair to the bowler
Get rid of fielding restrictions. When they were introduced in the 1992 world cup they were unique and introduced a new form of cricket but really are irrelevant in t-20. I would retain powerplays in ODI but give complete control to the teams (10 decided by the batting team and 10 by the fielding). But in just 20 overs with the batsman already going hammer and tongs, it makes little sense to me
Get rid of bowling restrictions. This is something I have never understood, even in ODI. If a batsman can play on and on, why is a bowler not given the same right?
Restrict the number of batsmen. This may be slightly radical but just follow me through. When there are just 20 overs, batsmen can go hammer and tongs because they know the chances of getting all out in this span is very low. But what if you told the batting team that if you lost five wickets the innings was over? How would they react? Would that even things out a bit in favour of the fielding team? It probably would. Some of you would react that cricket is a game of 11 vs 11 but that wouldn’t change. The batting team could still choose the batting order from its 11 people. But just as its innings is perforce finished when 20 overs are done, so would it be when 5 wickets fall. Why 5? I don’t know. 6 or 7 is also fine. It would probably need some statistical analysis to figure out the correct number. But as a concept can we agree that since there are only 20 overs, a batting team does not need the luxury of 10 wickets?
So, these are some suggestions to even things out between batsmen and bowlers in the 20-20 format. However, there are no doubts that the kind of skills required in 20-20 will be slightly different than tests and ODI’s. And of course, we have seen many “20-20” specialists. In the past we had “one day specialists” such as Bevan and Ajay Jadeja. And as time goes on and the number of tests reduce we are probably going to see more of Test specialists (Cheteshwar Pujara, anyone?)
But England have taken this to a different pitch with different captains for Tests, one days and t-20. At one level, it may be the right decision but it just gives the feeling of where will it all end? Cricket has always been a game with a high level of graininess in its description – tests and ODI’s, home and away, first innings and second innings, mutual series and so on. That is why you can have as absurd records as “record seventh wicket partnership for England in the 2nd innings of a game played between India and England at Headingley”
So, with captaincy too are we going to see such level of detail in the future – captains for home games and away games, captains for different opponents, captains for first innings and second innings, captains based on the ground the game is being played.
And in all this, the coach will sit in the background and smile!
