Why oh why, Farah?

I remember the time when Main Hoon Na released. Skeptical and curious about a choreographer turning director, I was sitting at PVR Priya's with a bunch of as-crazy-as-you-get Shah Rukh Khan fans. Amidst the hooting and impromptu dancing, I had one of the best times ever in a movie hall. I came out with a spring in my step and still laughing aloud. Here was a director who spoke directly to me, shared my passion for old Hindi cinema, and cracked my kind of jokes.

And then came Om Shanti Om and I loved that one too. The jokes cracked me up again and the emotions got me all teary eyed.

So, needless to say there were lots of expectations from Tees Maar Khan. And all I am still left with after a day of watching it, is utter disbelief.

What happened to our shared sense of humour Farah? How and when did you cross the thin line and go to the other side of silly land? How did the dialogues of your movies which were so delightful turn into laboured lines of idiocy?

No, your film didn't entertain me, didn't make me laugh, didn't get me emotional and didn't do anything. It just made me gasp with disbelief that I could so dislike your movie.

No on second thoughts, there is something that touched me. Your obvious love and loyalty towards your husband Shirish Kunder.. Shirish is one lucky guy and I am one unlucky viewer.

8 Lessons to learn from: HISSS

Do you like movies that make you think and reflect on what you learnt from them?
I do. For those who missed it (about 100% of the civilized world), here is the summary of the magnum opus we know as Hisss.

1. Cancer is routinely curable. All you need is to extract a jewel from a cobra. Yes, cobras have jewels. The cobra has to be female, though. Yeah, male cobra jewels don’t cure cancer. They cure AIDS.
2. Snakes are familiar with the concept of kidnap and ransom.
3. MS Paint is the best way to make great 20th century movie graphics. Especially when it recreates already existing designs like Angelina Jolie’s poorly Photoshopped snake-woman costume from Beowulf.
4. Female cobras tracking down kidnapped snakeboyfriends are possessed by a sense of justice that makes them find and gruesomely kill men who mistreat women. Anywhere. In fact, they might spend all their time doing that, and forget about the snakeboyfriend till the end of the movie.
5. Female cobras have several superpowers: that of owning ridiculous jewellery (like Bappi Lahiri), that of changing into women (like Bobby Darling), that of not wearing clothes (like Salman Khan), that of accidentally running into evil people who need killing (like Superman) and that of making people scream (like Maria Sharapova).
6. When police find that an American has kidnapped a snake and the snake’s girlfriend is out for revenge, they raise an eyebrow, scream a bit and go about their business. Nothing ever perturbs them. They are Zen.
7. Julian Lennon composed music for the film. Now we know, John Lennon wasn’t assassinated. He shot himself in disgrace.
8. No matter who directs the movie, whether it’s a Bollywood or Hollywood movie, or what year it is, a naagin movie is guaranteed to put you to sleep in less than 5 seconds.

Why Is Rahul Failing???

Because he has yet to show his administrative mettle.

Bihar results should come as an eye opener for the Congress in the Hindi heartland as their public mascots are failing to attract votes. Perhaps they need to re-strategise their winning formulas if they wish to break the two-decade old jinx and win the largest, but the most backward state, Uttar Pradesh from where their revival in the Northern belt could start.

The alibi that the Congress is trying to extricate itself from the cesspool of coalition politics is not credible as people suspect them of exploiting the CBI probe tool to keep the troublesome allies like Mayawati, Lalu Prasad Yadav — even Mulayam Singh Yadav in check. Yes the party has to start from scratch !

How? Perhaps by convincing the electorate that the Congress would return to the so call Indira’s slogan of ‘Roti, Kapda and Makan’ with no communal, political or caste considerations derailing it at any cost. This could mean taking tough stand against both Hindu and Muslim fundamentalists without fearing any political backlash from either of the two communities.

Is Congress ready for that?

The prospects don’t look very bright but for the very reason that finally the development plank is back in the poll arena. The electorates in recent assembly polls in Northern states have pushed caste and communal considerations aside to vote for development. Even Ayodhya verdict couldn’t help Lalu as predicted by many as the Muslims opted for Nitish’s development to Lalu’s communal card.

UP is crying for development. Successive governments led by almost every party from the BJP to the SP and the BSP in the last two decades have not delivered. Not that the Congress regimes pre 1990 were any better. But whatever development was made in the state was during that regime– people remember the days of Vir Bahadur Singh and Narain Dutt Tiwari.

Can Rahul be Bihar’s Nitish? Speculations are already there that UP will be the launch pad for Rahul’s beginning as an administrator.

It’s another matter that Congress has a major credibility issue, bogged down as it is with scams coupled with the charge of indecisions and inaction. The recent 2G scam has punctured the hype created by Obama’s visit.

The question that comes to mind is why is Rahul failing. People like him, but they don’t vote for him. His yatras get applause, not votes. They clap when he talks about cleansing the political system, they love it when he appeals the youth to join politics, they like to emulate him when he dumps security concerns and walks and talks like a commoner.

But when it comes to polls, they don’t vote for him. Bihar is an example.

So are the two November by-polls in UP – in Lakhimpur Khiri and Etah, where people preferred upcoming parties like the Peace Party floated by a medical professional to national parties like the Congress. Though Mulayam Singh Yadav won both the seats, the runner up were little known political groups.

To me it appears, the top-heavy Congress doesn’t have a machinery, the infrastructure to convert crowds into votes.

Secondly, its credibility in the northern belt is in question- people neither trust its intent nor its winnability.

Thirdly, which perhaps is the most important, they want Rahul to showcase his competence by translating his much-hyped vision into practice. Mere speeches or a commoner’s conduct would not work as a magic wand when people want action, that too swift ones.

In other words power comes with responsibility.

Obama is right. Stable Pakistan is good for us

The breathless media, at least in India, has debated threadbare US Prez Obama's decision not to single out Pakistan as the perpetrator of terror. Instead, when asked directly by students in Mumbai why and how Pakistan is a strategic partner of the United States, he proffered that India should work towards improving relations with Pakistan and that it is better for both nations if India were to do so. Almost alluding that India has not done its bit towards making it work with Pakistan. He repeated that later at the joint press conference in Delhi.

Quite expectedly, the commentators have had a field day, with most trashing Obama and some even saying, based on his first 7 minute speech itself that the visit is a disaster and will be written off as a failure.

For these commentators, the reactions from Pakistan's side are telling. Almost all analysts spoken to from the other side have stressed that Obama's reluctance to name Pakistan specifically shows the high esteem he holds the nation in and also chuckled at, what they interpret as a mild insult to his hosts.

But keep your patriotic hat aside for a moment, and don't go into the politics of it all, you would see merit in what Obama had to say. Of course Pakistan has unleashed a wave of terror on us, of course the nation has been training terrorists to target India and Indians, of course it forced us into a war, of course it creates trouble in Kashmir all the time. But just think for a moment, would Pakistan be as scary a nation as it currently is for us if it were stable?

Remember, it is not merely a nuclear armed nation, but one who's control and command is suspect. Who is in real control is always in doubt. Is it the civilian administration? Is it the President? Is it the Prime Minister? Is it their powerful army? Is it the powerful ISI? What control or influence do the powerful terror organisations that are mentored by the state have over these weapons? These are the questions that are worrisome, extremely at that. Add to that the unstable nature of the regime and the real fear arises.

Wouldn't you be more comfortable if your nuclear powered neighbour was stable instead?  I would certainly be happier to live in a state where when I visit the market, or travel by train, I go to enjoy the experience alone or move from point A to B and not worry about whether some moron has sneaked through the security apparatus and planted something to kill and maim my countrymen. Sure, even if there is a stable nation, some individuals can be expected to indulge in such stupid activities, but chances of it being state sponsored would go down, I think. And we know well that an unstable Pakistan sponsors these terrorists.

And look at what can happen with stability. We may be a fast growing economy, but despite platitudes from Obama and several world leaders that need Indian business, that India is "not a rising power, but a power that has arrived" the truth is we languish at the bottom of almost all human indicators. To address some of these basic factors such as education, health and hygiene, infrastructure, etc, we need huge funds. Huge expenditure on defence necessitated by an unstable nuclear armed neighbour denies our own citizens the funds that could have been used to improve the quality of their lives.

So, even if Obama refuses to name Pakistan as a terror state, perhaps for his own domestic and economic compulsions, perhaps to negate the growing Chinese influence on a nation that is strategically located for access to the riches in the area US in interested in, the fact is unwittingly too he wants us to do something that would benefit, not harm us.

We must, therefore not feel bad about it. Instead, going by the actions and deeds so far on this visit, it seems we may actually be in a stronger position to drive harder bargains than anytime in the past. Seize that opportunity. Build on a growing relationship with the US, but at our terms. Remember, it is the US that is getting billions of dollars worth of business, it is the US that will have "fifty thousand jobs created" as a result of the deals signed in India during this visit. It is the US that is now indebted to us.  Perhaps Obama has already started repaying some of it by seeking a stable Pakistan. Of course, it would help if he also stopped rewarding that nation by throwing obscene amounts of funds to fight terror, knowing fully well where those funds are siphoned off. Pakistan is a prime example of a failed policy that says terror can be contained, indeed purchased with money.

BO is Coming...

It is festival season in India. The festivals at this time of the year
start off with Dussehra - the festival of the goddess and its various
forms. It winds through a few smaller festivals like Karva Chauth and
reaches a crescendo with Diwali - the festival of lights, arguably the
biggest festival in India. The season signs off with Christmas and New
Year.

But this year, Indian media has a special festival - a festival
that is off the calendar. The Barack Obama (BO) festival. And like all
festivals, we will be treated by our media here in near encyclopedic
formats. Presidents and residents of lesser nations do not get much
coverage as the President with the teleprompter does. Having supported him during his elections, it is a bit of an irony that his visit here comes at a time when the nation which elected him is not sure about the change they believed in. But, as it is a festival, we wont let it matter too much in our coverage.  

The media in India is already falling over each other to tell us
everything about the man that is BO. The breathtaking coverage that
will end like an Olympics race with split second differences. And as
voracious readers/viewers as we are, you can bet that they know
more about BO and his visit than he can. Expect bumper offers at shops,
shopping festivals and BO quizzes as the season peaks. It may not reach
the manic proportions with BO tees or BO masks and BO caps, but it
could. Could we see cutouts of BO erected at crossroads and offered
milk? Perhaps.

As the day of his coming draws closer, TV Coverage
will peak and reveal everything they are allowed to cover and uncover.
Today I learnt that his personal chef will prepare a variety of dishes
for him. One newspaper has speculated that he could have what they call a Malai Tikka burger (if something like that exists). Over the next few
weeks, we will know the colour of his room furnishings, his
handkerchief, his blackberry and his dogs favourite food as well. But we
don't stop at that. We will know the cologne he wears, the colour of his
socks and also that the colour of his shoes is not exactly what we see.
We will know his menu each day, possibly before the President himself.
And after his visit, restaurants could offer yet another "Presidential
Platter" or his table at a "special" prize. 

At every pitstop of his, we will hear the back story
of the man who is his driver and marvel at the good fortune of the
doorman who got to hold the door for that microsecond. In between there
will be rare exclusive interviews of the man who waited on him, the
person who got to iron his jacket or the tailor who was suddenly called
in to repair a stitch on the Nobel prize winner. It is this eye for
detail that makes Indian media so great for visitors.  

Our media has convinced us that we scored a
diplomatic victory by not getting him to visit our neighbour. They have
begun well. Over his visit, a lot of non victories need to be gift
wrapped for us. If we are distracted enough, we might even forget the
irony that, to the man bearing the peace prize - we would have ended up signing up deals worth millions if not billions of dollars worth of weapons by the time his visit ends.

Get young on Kashmir

When was the last time you saw an MBA grad or a research student stripping off his shirt, baring his hairy chest to the muzzle of a gun, challenging the frazzled security personnel to pull the trigger? When was the last time you heard of students keeping to the straight and narrow of campus education throwing their career out of the window and walking shoulder to shoulder with protesters, demanding withdrawal of armed forces from their turf? Not often. Not very often.

India hasn't seen many stirring student movements since the 1990 Mandal agitation. Note the year. 1990. Within months of the agitation, India opened up its economy, let the globalization breeze in -- it helped mint-fresh college graduates to reap rich job benefits. The ghost of unemployment -- at least the way it came to haunt the left-of-the-centre India in 1970s and 1980s -- was to be put to fire and, hopefully, for ever. Just around then, in the quiet Kashmir Valley, secessionism, too, began taking roots, robbing an entire generation of the innocence of its childhood. This generation of kids born after 1989 went to sleep to the lullaby of jackboots, played to the report of gunfire, and attended schools and colleges during squeezes of time when curfew was lifted.

This is a generation of kids which grew up on vitriol, and not on the oxygen of free speech the rest of India had plenty in store. For a nanosecond, contrast this generation with the kids of liberalisation -- whose journey is purposefully aspirational, pursuing campus education with a definite window to the booming job market, and a placid ecosystem that got punctured by terror attacks only of late.

Whenever terror attacks shatter the calm of a metro, students, in all their seriousness, light a candle, shed a tear or two, and wear white T-shirts and march down the downtown thoroughfare. Not for them bunking of classes and holding demonstrations at the townsquare, screaming their lungs out for a cause. This is certainly not to belittle their concern; they're certainly bothered as much about the nation's security as like any concerned patriot. But the kind of violent protests that bring students out on to the streets of Kashmir has something to do with the way they have been treated since their childhood.

That street protests in the Valley since mid-June this year have the clear sanction of troublemakers, maybe from across the border, is a given. There's no denying that there's inciting from a section of separatists. But the question is: why is that an increasing number of educated youth are turning up at protests and defying the forces the way they do? Has the voice of the youth been muzzled in a medley of political rhetoric? Have the youth been given short shrift in the New Delhi-centric solution-finding exercise? Have the youth's hopes been blighted by the bayonets of the forces?

It's a paradox of ridiculous proportions that the youth in Jammu and Kashmir chief minister Omar Abdullah hasn't found a matching wavelength with the agitating young men and women of the Valley. Call it out of the box, but try holding open houses on the Kashmir problems on the campuses: let each political party send a representative to listen to what the students have to say. Throw open a debate. Let students take the mike, let them speak, let them be heard. For a change, let netas listen to them. Set up a webpage and invite their suggestions and opinions on what's going wrong with their state and what correctives do they carry in their quiver. Let them hurl solutions, not stones.

At the risk of being dubbed an agent provocateur, I'd say if we don't listen to the Kashmiri youths today, tomorrow we may have to argue with them in a toxic war tongue, for this generation __ brought up on a deadly cocktail of denial of rights, war-like neighbourhood and a democratically elected government that's never there __ could spring a nasty surprise. Craft a delectable policy with the youth being the centrepiece. It might work.

Whose boycott?

Writing in the Sunday Times of India, Chetan Bhagat made an impassioned plea to all of us common citizens not just of Delhi but of all of India to boycott the Commonwealth Games. The writer argued that showing any form of support to the CWG would be to endorse the seemingly bottomless pit of corruption and scams that lies beneath the veneer of an event supposedly meant to promote sport in this country. It is an excellent argument.

Regrettably it won't work in practice. Why? Because you can't boycott someone, or something, that has already boycotted you.

Mohandas Gandhi used boycotts to protest against colonial rule by urging Indians not to buy British-made goods. The strategy was at least partly successful in that it must have hurt imperial coffers, whether or not it stung imperial pride. However, as rapacious and thick-skinned as our colonial masters undoubtedly were, it seems that in both rapacity as well as thickness of skin they have been outdone by our current set of rulers. Under foreign rule, Indians could make their dissent felt by boycotting British products and institutions. Today, a boycott by us of a sarkari product like the CWG, for example, will have little or no impact as it is becoming increasingly clear that our present-day powers-that-be have boycotted us long before we could boycott them, or any of their projects.

In the case of the Commonwealth Games, for instance, it was or ought to have been clear right from the start that the whole show was going to be a money-making exercise for various sarkari agencies, and their contractors, suppliers and middlemen. The participation of the athletes, the involvement of the general public, and the promotion of national pride appear not to have entered into official calculations at all. What we, the common citizens, thought of the Games, or what our experience of the event would be, was not of even marginal concern. Those responsible for the preparations and running of CWG represent a closed system from which the general public has been excluded: the Games boycotted us before we could boycott the Games.

So skip the Games, if you so choose. Your absence (or your presence) won't really matter. Because, whether you're there or not, the primary purpose of the Games will have been achieved: that all those within the loop of organising and preparing for the event end up making a lot of money.

The CWG is only one example of the sarkari boycott of the people. Farmers of western UP are up in arms because, in the name of 'progress' and 'public interest', some 22,000 villages in the area are going to be bulldozed without payment of adequate compensation to make way for the Yamuna Expressway. Which 'public' is this and what is its 'interest'? Is it the general public, or is it the self-enclosed coteries of politicians, bureaucrats and contractors whose sole interest is to rake in as much money as possible from such 'public interest' projects?

The tribal communities of India have long been boycotted by successive governments. Many have been displaced from their traditional forest habitats, again in the name of 'progress' and 'public interest'. The intervention of the Supreme Court has highlighted the plight of the Kondhs of Orissa whose ecologically-fragile homelands in the Niyamgiri hills were threatened by bauxite mining operations which had been given governmental clearance without adequate environmental safety checks. But for each such case reported, a dozen or more slip beneath the radar screen. Can tribals boycott sarkar-approved mines, or steel plants, or do such projects boycott tribals?

The boycott by the weak citizen of a powerful raj was Gandhigiri. Today we are witnessing the boycott by a powerful sarkar of weak citizens. Gandhigiri or goondagiri?