Books, Books and Books..

I've been reading as if this my last chance to read. In last 15 days or so, I've been through at least a dozen books. Not much work, insomnia, lackluster IPL, no movies, zero-shopping, anti-social mood have all contributed to the reading spree in their own way. I wonder, what would I be without books.  As I write that, the paranoid in me kicks in to remind me my to-do list: write on "why not to read books" as one of pustakam.net's upcoming articles. 

Though, it has been much fun writing for pustakam, looks like I'm getting too conscious there. And I'm my worst, when I get conscious. What I write about books is miles away from what you call, literary criticism. Nor do I enjoy, *studying* literature. I'm not the kind to break sentences, peep through them and find something. I'm happy burrowing through the work. Fiction or not, I'm fine as long as I can stand (better, understand) what's the author is trying to convey. May be, I'm a butterfly reader. It's high time, I accept that. 

Well, getting on track.. the books I read / reading. 

Who the hell is Julian Barnes? I was introduced to Flaubert's Parrot a while ago, and I did read few pages of it, not noticing who wrote it. Yesterday, when I came across "Nothing to be frightened of", I took him as stranger. Only after reading his profile, did I realize, he isn't that stranger to me. This book (Nothing to be..) is a collection of essays on death. Death being one of my pet topics, I couldn't resist, starting with it. The bonuses, however, were another favourite topic, God and introduction to Jules Renard's Journals. 

I'm too lazy to categorize myself into atheist or antagonist or whatever. I, with all sincerity, don't care if God exists or not. If he does, it would be nice catching up with him for a chat. If not, oh, the world remains petty much the same to me. So, if any of these anti-God statements sound to me as the sound of timber, when the opposition batsman is bowled out, I guess, it's only because, I love people venting out frustration.

God + Death should make for one of those irresistible exy (existentialism) combination. I enjoyed the book, despite enough complaints. 

It was momentary decision to read "Portraits of a Marriage" by Sandor Maria, as soon as I read the first line in Middlestage. Half way through it, I forced myself to take a break from it. What an emotional roller coaster ride?! Taxing. Nevertheless, worth the time and effort. One of those books, which read like research material on human relations.

India Vs Australia, Adelaide Test 2003 (from The Hindu Group) was a surprise addition to my list. Hardly 40 pages, it doesn't take more than hour to complete it, accommodating nostalgic trips to and fro. Deeply disappointed with the book. Having read Cardus, everyone look like amateurs to me. It would take at least few pages to try and explain what this particular victory means to me!  Planning to write about it soon. 


Ramanujan's life in Kanigel's words was an enriching experience. To the psycho-analyst in me, the 360 degree view of Ramanujan, was rewarding. The Hardy-Ramanujan relation was a wonder in itself. Now that I've an idea of Hardy's world, revisiting "The Mathematician's Apology" wouldn't be such a bad idea. 

Julian and Hardy, both, are cricket buffs. Both from UK. Just for the record. 

Asleep by Banana Yoshimoto was the first book I read after, in fact soon after, Mullapudi gaari demise. Unable to cope up with the uninvited tears in a public place, I was forced to take refuge in a book, any book. Luckily, Asleep was what came to hand. Banana's prose took me completely into it, and almost did the trick of blow-drying my tears. The bottom line of each story in it was that: blow-dried eyes acting up! 

Asleep reminds me of my victory over insomnia. (Ok. Pseudo-victory) Given the egoist I'm,  when sleep ignores me, I ignore her. Things have gone so worse between us, that we no longer pretend. Or don't even pretend pretending. I found (or at least thought I've found) a way around her. I took my kindle with a torch beneath the blanket. When that proved painful, I chose text-to-speech on kindle to keep her at bay. By the way, reading on kindle is such a joy. I read double fast on it! I'm increasingly getting comfortable using it, while continuing to crib about the ancient navigation buttons.

Thus I read (aka listen) Saramago's Seeing! He demystifies writing as simply as, "sit-and-write, nothing-else". But I wonder how can his imagination can go to that level of detail. He blew me away. What an imagination! Take a bow, Sir! I've started with "Baltasar and Blimunda", but somehow couldn't give the undivided attention Saramago demands. Have to get back to it. 

Although, Saramago insisted on reading out loud his novels, since he writes in the talking style, I missed his peculiar punctuation, so much so that I forced to re-read those marathon paragraphs.  

Read Knut Hamsun's Hunger. Made a very interesting read. A month ago, I left this book, mid-way through, but after having heard Steve Toltz speak so high of him. His other book "Mysteries" which Madhuri introduced here is still out of my reach. Proj. Gutenberg gave me a chance to get hands on "Looking back at Happiness." 

The most human human was one pain in the ....... No. I don't intend to abuse. Just looking for the right word. May be, pain in the soul? Sounds too melodramatic. No?


Revisiting Bapu Bommala kathalu. It's joy indescribable. Surprising myself, started with Calvin and Hobbes and Peanuts for the first time ever. Winnie, the pooh is also around! 

Adam Gilchrist is my most favourite Australian. But Steve Toltz is coming threateningly close to that spot. His first book was such a treat, that I can't wait for the second. Are you listening, Mr. Toltz? 
    

Bro..

People who are sick of me, complain that I think too much. People who aren't.. well, they too complain the same. And to prove that I've a hint of sanity going into my thinking, I need strong backups. Like the case I'm trying to present here.

Harsha Bhogle's candid talk with Ayaz Memon is here and here. If you enjoy sensible talking, don't miss them. If you wanna still come back here, petty welcome. There are many topics which that interview touched upon, but here I've decided to talk about elder brothers.

Lets say there's a kid. He has got his eye on a toy, which isn't easily available to him. So, he first tries to get with his own efforts. When that doesn't work, he attracts / detracts the elders to get it for him. If they don't readily agree, he'll start playing his tricks. Finally, he gets what he wants. That's an happy ending? Not really.

After he played with it to heart's content, he may start fiddling it. Or throw it away. Or while still having fun with this toy, something much more fanciful may catch his attention. Now what? Repeat of the above para?

No matter what our age accounts to, I believe, we've this kiddish tendency to be back of something fanciful. Sometimes money. Sometimes security. Yet another time, family. We keep hopping from one thing to another. Without even realizing, we tend to be the same with what / whom we love too.

Here is the need of someone to try and keep us from distractions and help us focus on the toy in hand. The best possible choice, according to me, is an elder brother.

Why not a mom? A dad? Or a sis?

May be, it's just about any body who can see you through with your life. May be, it's just that I'm over-romanticizing the role of an elder bro. May be, I'm biased. Ok.. I'm biased!

There are moments in life, when you're in self-doubt. You can deal with the world, but not with yourself. Those are the moments when you need somebody to stand by you, stand for you.

You've your exams next week and you break your hand today. How nice it is to have a bro to tell you, "Chill! This is nothing! This can utmost hurt you for 3 days. Not more."

How *fantastic* (yes, that's the word!) would it be to lean on the shoulder of an elder bro and cry to your heart's content, for having lost your love, for having lost a beloved, for messing up life, or for getting messed up by life?

A person, who shared the same womb as you did. A person, who was sent few years ahead of you, as if  to set the world right for you. Who, while still a kid to his parents, starts parenting you. Who, while still toying with life, makes sure you've the right toys. Who, while still finding his path, guides you. Who, without being a lover to somebody, is already showering love upon you. He's a mom, dad and a friend all-in-one package.

Not that, everyone with an elder bro can get that lucky. Most of the times, the beauty of a relationship boils down to the two individuals in it, rather than the relation itself. But whoever has got it, I call them the luckiest souls. Where you end up with such wonderful support system for your life, is again a million dollar question.

Harsha opines that we need an elder-brother-culture and see if that helps our budding talent handle life well. Not too sure, if that works. Forced upon relations could be taxing.

I don't dream of meeting a Sachin Tendulkar. But yes, would hate myself, if I lose an opportunity to meet Ajit.

After all, a Sachin Tendulkar ain't a Sachin Tendulkar, without an Ajit Tendulkar! 

God bless the elder bros!

RGV's Rakta Charitras

Got a chance to watch RGV's bloody saga on Ananthapur's factionist and surprising myself, I've sailed through the two parts of Rakta Charitra. Here are few thoughts on it.

The movie was neither good nor bad. Otherwise put, it's equally good and equally bad.

Flip side:

• All said and done, this is a gutsy film. Probably, a subject only someone like RGV can take up. Though they have been innumerable movies on the faction-ism and few on the factionists lives (like Sree Ramulayya and all), this is an attempt to portray two lives which had substantial influence on all of Andhra Pradesh in one way or the other.
• The best part of this attempt is, it neither supports nor disprove faction or people involved it. It just tries to act as a mirror to what has happened and leave it to the viewer to approve / disprove it according to his own understandings.
• According to me, the point RGV was trying across is, no one is good / bad by default. Individuals take the form and shape of the society they live in. Dialogues like, "Killing here is not a play. It's a need." drive the point home.
• The cast was fabulous. Though I thought actors like Kota were underutilized. 
• Loved Surya. His eyes were emotions at their best. No wonder I liked second part better than first one.
• The roles of  Shatrughna Sinha and Subhalekha Sudhakar played were my favourite. They scared me the best. :P

Flops:

• It is, probably, a problem for every creator. Tendency to do it all by yourself or to be everywhere possible. RGV's voice over to the film was pathetic, ridiculous and a huge let down. The narration could have been more gripping.. the voice could have done magic to the movie. But RGV has taken it for granted.
• I didn't see a point in having two parts for this movie. Especially when he miserably failed to project the good-bad combo in Pratap's character. When Pratap had reached his peak, how did it affect some parts of the society? What were the negativity in doing all this? I'd heard about Paritala Ravi's regime in his area from someone who has seen it up close. As my friend was narrating to it, chills were running down my spine. For a moment, I was wondering how on earth can such things happen in a democratic country like ours. This movie failed to highlight the point. To project that regime, that kingdom as it was.. which was heaven to people inside it and hellish misery for people outside it. It could have been a 3 hour long one movie, rather than 2 parts. 
• The violence is in the movie was surprisingly not scary enough. Not that I wanted to see too much of bloodshed, but I expected the movie to project the ferocity or wildness that is usually associated with such factionists. Pratap's murder in part 2, came too easily to leave an impact. 

 All in all, if you can sit through it - for four hours of well researched content and leniently executed attempt - this movie is thought provoking. Since the director doesn't take stands, it's on the viewer to do the rest of the thinking.

 For me, the best dialogue was when some MLA's complaint to the CM about Pratap saying, "He is spitting at democracy." To which, CM replies:

"Oh.. how about the days when democracy had spat at him?"

That kinda summarizes it for me. What goes around, comes around! Be it among people or be it between people and the system.

Cricket Ramblings

My head's got so many things thinking about, it's gonna be real hard to stick to a topic in this post. The intention is however to be in and around cricket. 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Day began with Dileep Premachandran's article on Sourav Ganguly. Having been his fan for this long, nothing from him comes as a surprise. So, when he says, "I don't see a point in playing cricket, now.", I support him with the usual fervour.  Looking back, this guy has been such an inspiration in my life, in terms of doing what I wanna do and speaking my mind on it.. I sometimes wonder if he IS the key ingredient to the personal I'm today. Love you, Sourav Daa.. always! 

**********

It is always good to know somebody else is also thinking on the same lines as you. At least, it surprises me when I see my mind in others' words. Two of cricinfo's articles almost stole the words from my mouth. Both relating to India in WC 2003. 


For me the most remarkable of India's wins because of bowling performance are victories against england and NZ in WC'03. It's always such a rarity to see an Indian bowler being absolutely ruthless in his attack. If Nehra's performance was such a beauty, the aggression and accuracy of Zaheer against NZ had me floored. I precisely remember sitting on the top of the sofa.. I know that's weird way of sitting.. at the beginning of the match, and was on the ground by the time Zaheer completed his first spell. Man! Wasn't he a treat to watch in that match?! 

While watching the repeating highlights of various WCs on star cricket, to my own surprise, I quipped: It might have been a different story, had Laxman featured in that WC final. It's too much of a thought, but over the years,  Laxman has just grown in stature of being Australia's nemesis. 

Rahul's article here

***************

Gautam Ghambir's statement, "No one would die if India doesn't win the world cup.", shows the need to be realistic with our chances and the nature of the game itself. If India wins, it would inspire a million others to pick up bats and balls. If not, nothing is truly lost.. except another chance to be champions. 

***************

When I talk, people tend to think that either I'm too ignorant or intellectual to be termed as sane. 

For instance, when I theorized that sledging is a good idea and can reap rich benefits, out of my own limited ping-pong playing experiences, I got similar weird looks. Get ready to make your eyebrows dance, as I present my theory here. 

Any player, according to me, has two layers - 1. skill 2. attitude. Individually, they don't need long drawn explanations. But the combination of both is petty interesting. Let's just take binary values of the two attributes to put the theory simple.

Assuming you're some one with right level of skill and attitude needed for the competition. 

No skill. No attitude. : Can be dusted off soon.
No skill. Loads of attitude: As a opponent, you should be ready for surprises. 
Skill. Right attitude: That's a deadly combination. Win or loss, you'd be in for some serious blows. Here's where your mental strength of performing under adverse conditions comes to your rescue. 

Skill. No attitude. This is an interesting combination. This could be anyone's game. But if I'm the opponent and if I get the idea of the skills of opponent, I find it petty wise to start playing the mind's game. Playing to the best of your ability, surely rises the game's standard.. but if you can play on the guy's mind, it could get favourable to you. Also, I believe in utilizing correct skills at apt times. I don't think,  trying too hard to get rid of a good batsmen with average temperament isn't that great an idea. If I'm a captain, I'd insist on bowler targeting  batsmen's mind as well as his stumps, not just his stumps alone. That case, even a wide delivery can get him a wicket, needn't be an unplayable delivery. 

My point is mind games work. Sledging is a part of it. It needn't get too abusive, involving mothers and wives. But well, ethics put apart, sledging of any kind works, reaping rich benefits. 

So, when the man himself admitted saying, "I sledged once and it worked", I loved the statement. It's the "worked" part of the statement that makes me proud of my own analysis. :P 

After all the world we're in is not so gentlemanly!