From a shared computer at office in 2003 and posts written over the weekend, to a shared computer at home and posts written over the weekend and scheduled for days far ahead in 2013, it’s been one awesome journey. Thank you for reading. 🙂
until next time, tenacious
Ashwin Sanghi
Ashwin Sanghi’s second book in the history-fiction genre after The Rozabal Line. The book follows two narratives, one 2300 years in the past – following the lives of Chanakya and his protege Chandragupta Maurya, drawing heavily from actual history, and the other, a modern day version of the same tale featuring fictional characters – Chandini Gupta and her mentor Pandit Gangasagar Mishra.
Despite the similarities in the overall plot, the difference in characters and situations ensured that I didn’t have a constant feeling of deja vu. The author also manages to bring in the machinations and possibilities in modern day politics – the nexus between politicians, businessmen, media, the creation of vote banks, alliances of convenience etc, and weaves in contemporary political events into the story, thus adding to the interest. Though slightly predictable, the storytelling is racy enough to constantly make you wonder what happens next. Unlike The Rozabal Line, this plot might be relatively familiar to Indian readers, but the flip side is that you won’t be easily confused despite the huge list of characters.
There are a couple of things that put me off in this book. One was the lack of nuance in the use of language in the two narratives. The words and expressions used in the ‘past’ narrative are contemporary in nature, and it was difficult to imagine a Chanakya use (for example) ‘bloody’ quite regularly. The other was the use of clichéd quotes and wordplay. To his credit, the author provides an exhaustive list of credits, but if you’ve heard them before, it is difficult to imagine its usage by the character. Many a time, they also seem very forced, seemingly creating elaborate but unnecessary conversations just so the quotes can be used by the character.
All things considered, it is a decent read, and like it or hate it, you’re not likely to be bored.
(via Threadless)
A conversation in office on an unrelated topic led me to ask this question on Twitter.
A conversation made me think – are we more ok with business ideas/models being aped compared to creative ideas? If so, why?
— manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
..and @atulkarmakar gave me his perspectives
@atulkarmarkar exactly, why the different rules?
— manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
@atulkarmarkar hmm, that does not apply to ads no?
— manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
@atulkarmarkar in fact ads is what made me think of it in the first place 🙂
— manu prasad (@manuscrypts) April 15, 2013
Just like Atul mentioned, I had first considered whether it was because creative ideas were considered more personal and a business idea/model an impersonal, corporate entity. But my starting point had been advertising, to which this does not really apply. Compare the reactions of Company A replicating Company B’s business model/idea versus them being ‘inspired’ by their advertising. In the case of advertising, both agencies might get paid and both clients might benefit. But in the case of a business, the second player could benefit from the mistakes (strategy/execution) of the pioneer and build a more successful business. That would be really unfair to the first guy whose business idea might have been a really creative solution to some need. And yet, it’s more likely that the aping of ads would spark a larger debate and the business cloning would be ignored. Am I missing something? Any perspectives you want to share?
until next time, game of clones
We’ve been fans of the Bangalore Bistro on Brigade Road since the first time we had a meal there. Back then, we’d heard that it used to be originally on Cunningham Road. And that’s where we found it this time – in a building opp Fortis/Fun Cinemas, on the top floor. You can find the menu and map on Zomato. There are parking spaces on and off Cunningham Road, so it shouldn’t be very difficult to find a spot.
The restaurant has indoor and alfresco options, and we chose the latter. A table that gave us a good view of Cunningham Road, so we didn’t miss the earlier Bistro. 🙂 There is a sense of old world charm that the place used to exude and that has been kept intact. We decided on a ‘Chicken Vol en Vents’ for starters, and then learned that there were soups available, though they weren’t on the menu. We also asked for a Kit Kat Shake, which arrived first. This one was a little disappointing – lots of milk, and only some Kit Kat. Compared to the versions at The Chocolate Room or even Boca Grande, this was a really poor country cousin.
Thankfully, the Cream of Chicken soup made up for the disappointment – not very thick or creamy, but tasty nevertheless. The chicken starter – with smoked and creamy chicken on a crusty pastry – was also quite decent, though a tad bland.
For the main course, we asked for a Smokin’ Guns and a Honey Chilli Roast Chicken sizzler. The former was a baked dish and had chicken sausages and (pieces of ) a breast of chicken and a faint egg-like flavour. Quite liked it. The sizzler was hot, and it wasn’t just the temperature! The chilli was strong in this one, and though the honey put up a brave fight, it was no match, and even the flavoured rice with its mild tang could only do so much! Highly recommended if you can handle spice.
We really would’ve liked to try out the desserts, but were completely stuffed. The service was friendly and jovial, and quite prompt as well, despite a T20 match in progress. We gained a few pounds and felt lighter by just over Rs.1650, including a service charge. The new version managed to keep Bistro in our favourites list and was worth the journey across town. 🙂
Thanks to Zomato, I got to spend some bak bak time with Mayur back in February. Along with Rocky, this guy gets to do the two things I’d rather do always – eat and travel. While it was a fun meet up, it was impossible to agree on the subject of meat. Most of the others around were fanatical carnivores – like myself (and I was wearing a tee with the message above) – so we traded insults with him for the first few minutes before the man silenced us with “food is like religion, and you should not piss on other people’s temples”.
After that the conversation quickly moved to life philosophy. I (along with at least one other person) was curious to know how he kept himself interested in the food + travel routine. Wouldn’t it get monotonous? We talked of retaining child-like levels of curiosity and wonder, an openness to experiences, of starting the day asking what newness can be done today and realised that as we grow older, we look for reasons not to do things, as opposed to the reverse.
After taking my trip with a food quote, (and underlining his instant wit) he went off to talk to other folks, and the rest of discussed how this also translates to how we interact with other people. Earlier, we used to trust others until they gave us a reason not to, and these days, it’s exactly the reverse. I wondered if this is probably related to the ‘openness to experiences’ we had talked of earlier. (more…)