Category: Social Commentary

  • Success measures

    Kaamyaab is a wonderful movie – the subject, the performances, the sensitive portrayals, not to mention the nostalgia of seeing familiar old faces. Sanjay Mishra, playing Sudheer, a side-actor who decides to come out of retirement after realising that he is only one short of acting in 500 films, does a fantastic job of bringing to life the minds and lives of struggling actors. But, to me, good movies make you think beyond the scope of their narrative, and this one was no different.

    Before Sudheer began his mission of a 500th movie appearance, his life has settled into routines, and I found it difficult to fathom whether he regretted his career choice. For instance, he describes himself and others like him as “aloo” actors who can be added to any film. But he is also chuffed when he is recognised by people. And then there’s the alcohol. Is this how Babulal Chandola (Sudheer is a screen name) imagined his twilight years?

    We’re surrounded by success stories, not just from the movie business, but other walks of life too. Success, as we commonly define it, takes hard work, and luck. It requires the tenacity and perseverance to break through what Randy Pausch calls the “brick walls”. Bahut hi bekaar shahar hai,” Isha Talwar says in the movie, “Rejection ki aadat dalwa deta hai.”

    Kaamyaab draws attention to the not-so-successful, and brought up the question to me, again. What really is success, kaamyaabi? Being true to yourself, becoming exactly what you set out to become, but having to deal with the consequences of your trade-offs? Or being malleable with your trade-offs such that many a time your own desires are secondary, but being melancholic about the roads not taken?

    In the larger canvas of history, individual successes are blips, even the very best of them. But that’s philosophical, and it’s inevitable that as your film roll nears its end, you will analyse your role. Something that came up in an earlier post – The half of it. One which took me to whether to float with the tide, or to swim for a goal (Hunter S. Thompson).  My take for the future was to float with the tide and seek small goals while at it.

    I now realise that the questions of “why” and “what” still need an answer. One framing I have used in this context is FML – fame, love, money. Not by design, but the irony of the more traditional definition is unmistakable. Meanwhile, at a certain stage, after one’s biggest adversary is self image and not others, the love for something is the obvious answer (at least to me). Despite that, the motivation is not easy. I could really relate to a tweet by Orange Book, “You are not talentless, you just fell in love with comfort.” There are also the “false securities” that SRK eloquently framed in his tweet. Not completely past it. Related to that is the notion that one has done enough (for even the self image) to take a breather. All challenges to overcome!

    It almost seems like the opposite of life is not always death, it could be a lifestyle too! But then again, that depends on how  one measure success – happiness or contentment? At one point, they seem to be opposites too!

  • Peak Abstraction

    Saturday mornings are sometimes spent at the lake nearby – walking/jogging around it. A few weeks ago, I saw a few dressed-for-exercise folks spending the entire time doing an intense “exercise” – posing for selfies! To be fair, the lake is pretty, but..

    It led me to an interesting line of thought. Before I let you in on that, some context setting, or you might close the tab at the ridiculousness of it. Given that the species has lacked telepathy, we have been abstracting for a very long time. Sensations, emotions and thoughts that make up our subjective reality needed to be conveyed. We converted them into everything from facial expressions and actions to drawings to language – spoken, written and then published soon as we entered the machine age. You are now reading what I am thinking.  (more…)

  • In other fake news..

    Went by the title, did you? Ha! This is less about fake news, and more about what could be called its second order effect. In Against Empathy, Paul Bloom writes about how many beliefs are not the products of reasoning, and gives sports teams fans and even political support as examples. He also brings up the point that these views don’t really matter because of the minimal impact one person’s belief has on the world at large. The contrast offered is one’s everyday morality that affects those around. He goes on to say that because of this minimal impact, we should look at people’s views on global warming, health care etc in the same light. The difference between truth and their views does not really matter because it doesn’t really cause a huge impact. To be fair, he is not happy writing this. I wasn’t really happy reading it either, because I saw at least one horrible exception – think personal hygiene values (“I won’t use a deodorant because.. global warming”) and you’ll get the picture. That definitely has an impact!

    But moving on, he also explains how people are capable of rational thinking on things that matter. This is where I differ. I am not denying that people are capable. They probably begin that way, but I think the capacity is lost over time. Why do I think so? (more…)

  • Understanding the revolution

    No, I don’t think I am exaggerating when I call it a revolution. Relatively, it’s not a bloody one yet, but we’ve only begun. As individuals who are part of it, it is difficult for us to acknowledge, let alone grasp its consequences now. (read for perspective)

    To deal with something, I first need to make an attempt to understand it, and this post is just that. To begin with, I have noticed at least two parallel forces that have worked to get us to this point. The first is privilege and increasing inequalities in society, on which I have written quite a few posts. The second is a subject on which I’ve only written a couple of posts – intersubjective reality, but its influence is equally important. Let me elaborate.

    “But that’s the truth!”, I often hear, and for a while now, my response has been “Whose truth?”  For an absolutely mind bending perspective on it, read The Case Against Reality. (thanks Gautam) To massively paraphrase, we build “realities” based on the stories we tell ourselves, and this is completely shaped by our perceptions and biases. Everything we perceive is a mental representation and there is nothing objective about it. The closest we get to reality is by experiencing something ourselves, and that is inherently subjective. As Scott Adams brutally but succinctly put it, “Humans did not evolve with the capability to understand their reality because it was not important to survival. Any illusion that keeps us alive long enough to procreate is good enough.” (more…)

  • De-privacy

    A few unrelated incidents in the last month or so made me think about privacy, or rather, the lack of it. The first was news coverage on Bangalore Mirror where they skipped the standard blurring of the face of the accused/victim. I tweeted about it then.

    A couple of weeks later, I read the agonising story of the woman whose picture was all over social media during the Brussels bombing. It wasn’t just her harrowing experience that bothered me, but the fact that this was an exposure she didn’t want. She had no say in the matter from the time the first photo was clicked.  (more…)