This post was originally on Random musings... Thanks to Dr. Shivanand for making the suggestion to have it over here. I dwelled on this thought for a while and the following post is the result of my serious musings.
Post every match that India wins closely, and I am of course referring to the country's unofficial national sport, cricket, the people of the world's largest democracy go into a state of delirium; a dreamlike state where God is in his heaven and everything is fine on earth. It's unbelievable; the effect a single win has on the minds of the simple folk that populate this country. No matter that the win has come after consecutive losses, some of which were downright humiliating. All is forgiven, let bygones be bygones.
I have been blessed with a good memory and more often than not, this has worked to my disadvantage rather than advantage. There have been instances when I have desperately wanted to wipe some incident of my memory. I wanted to ensure that the diaphanous veneer of a thought that was casting a vibrant shadow on the innards of my mind was decimated, destroyed, decapitated. Yet, there it was. Many a thought continue to bother me till date. And that is where the apathy of the nation towards the past bothers me so. I will elucidate by citing some examples:
1. The defeat to Zimbabwe in the 1999 cricket World Cup, when only two runs were required to win, and that oaf of a person, Venkatesh had gotten himself out lbw to some obscure Zimbabwean bowler
2. The 1996 World Cup match against Australia at Wankhede where we were chasing a big total and Sachin was playing well. He was stumped off the bowling of Mark Waugh. He was out on 89 runs... We lost the match
I could go on, but the point I want to emphasize here is this: like the rest of the country, I am more concerned with how India fares in cricket than any other sport. And unlike most of the rest of the country, I remember every single instance when we have come agonizingly close to victory, but have managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. I remember the accolades that our sportspersons in other fields have achieved: Paes-Bhupathi winning the Wimbledon doubles, Karnam Malleshwari and her Bronze Medal, Herr Rathore and his Olympic Medal and of late, GM Anand becoming the World Champion.
Yet, none affects me as much as a loss in a cricket match...
Anyway, coming to the point at hand: why is it that in a country with a population in excess of a 1000 crores, we are able to find only a single Yuvraj Singh, a single Sania Mirza, a single Vishy? And worse, whenever that person wins for the country, all of us take credit for that win, glorifying the nation for a small period of time, forgetting all the humiliation that this country has to face in sports, simply because the "system" is not good. And even worse than that, we also look to Indian born or second generation sportspersons/celebrities/famous people for glory. Case in hand: Sunita Williams, whose recent visit to India was the worst publicity stunt that I have ever witnessed. Worse than Mani Ratnam asking a certain politician to see his film before the release to quell his concerns. I am of course speaking about Bombay, and the politician is well known. I have nothing against that politician; in fact some part of me respects him. Yet, there are many from his clan who are out to destroy whatever sporting talent exists in this nation.
The T20 winning team was forced to sit behind a line of politicians who were seeking political mileage, piggy backing on the brilliance of the cricketers. India has the highest ratio of staff to sportsperson at every Olympics. I believe that we touched the 4 bureaucrats per athlete at the 2004 Olympics, a feat which deserved a gold medal. I am sure that given the meagre pay that the athletes get, most of them are very tempted by drugs for glory, and even more are tempted to seek other more rewarding avenues. Such as a well paying job in an MNC, once some recognition has been achieved. Given this background, I don't really blame any of the country's sportspersons for putting personal glory ahead of the nation's pride. Why not? You and I would have done the same thing.
I wonder when we will start displaying consistency, both as a nation and as a cricketing team. Or any team representing India in any sport.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Saturday, October 20, 2007
Thought for the Day
No matter which direction you cycle, the wind is always against you.
Corollary: Changing your direction to change the direction of wind doesn' work!
There is no such thing as a good phase in life...
There are little less worse bad phases! :)
/Govindraj
Saturday, June 30, 2007
Indoor air pollution and cigarette smoke
These days, we hear a lot about indoor air pollution and its effect on human health. But what exactly is indoor air pollution? What are the sources of indoor air pollution? Why does it occur in the first place? Well, this article will try to provide some insights on that.
To start with, let me get to pollution in general. Contrary to popular belief, a pollutant is defined as a substance present in excess of its normal concentration in the environment. That means, any substance on this earth has a the potential to be a pollutant, if it is in the wrong place at the wrong time. Air pollution is a serious issue because unlike water and land pollution, physical boundaries are not sufficient to contain it. Pollution, in that sense, is a unifying factor across national and international boundaries! Consider the case in point: rapid industrialization in Germany and France led to Sweden's lakes turning acidic due to acid rain! Now, that is what they mean when they say that the world is getting closer.
Another myth is that CO2 is a pollutant. CO2 is a green house gas and is not a pollutant. CO2 will be called a pollutant if it is present in amounts exceeding 5000ppm and since there are a lot many sinks to this particular gas, there is scant possibility of this gas making it to that high a concentration. Anyway, coming back to the point at hand, we all know what ambient air pollution is. There are standards set by the Central Pollution Control Board [CPCB] which are known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS]. More information can be sought at the website: www.cpcb.nic.in
However, there are no standards prescribed for the indoor environment. Why is this so? Consider the fact that there are at least a million registered and un-registered architects all over the world and each one has her / his own way of designing buildings. Each one gives different weightage to lighting and ventilation factors. Ergo, it becomes difficult to gauge how much air is going into an indoor environment and how much is leaking to the atmosphere from it. Also, the definition of the indoor environment is such that it becomes difficult to make a standard. An indoor environment is any place / location where one is not exposed to the ambient air directly. That means every place, right from schools to cars to trains and aeroplanes fall in this category. That makes a difficult job, that of specifying standards, impossible.
What then, are the sources of indoor air pollution? There are many, and a partial list can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/airindoorairpollution.html [The website of the United States Environmental Protection Agency] You will find among the many listed sources a source called Environmental Tobacco Smoke (ETS). Note the use of the word Environmental. Cigarette smoke has not been referred to directly, because cigarette smoke itself is a part of ETS. ETS is constiituted by cigarette smoke as well as the smoke that the smoker exhales. Overall, ETS is more harmful than cigarette smoke by itself is.
The cigarette burns at a very high temperature when the smoker inhales and the tip of the cigarette can be at as high a temperature as 900 C. Which probably explains why cigarette burns take so long to heal! Nicotine, the habit forming chemical present in tobacco, does not lead to the production of harmful gases / particulate matter. It is the "tar" present in the tobacco which leads to production of carbon monoxide and carcinogens and poly aromatic hydrocarbos like phenanthrene, flouranthene, etc. Carbon monoxide reduces the oxygen carrying capacity of human blood because it forms an irreversible bond with haemoglobin. Particulate matter settles in the lungs, and cigarette smoke has such small particles that they can deposit in the alveoli, which are the places where gas transfer takes place in the lungs i.e. oxygen is swapped for CO2.
The smoke that a smoker exhales has more of these smaller particles than he / she has himself / herself inhaled, because they are too small to get deposited in the smoker's lungs. However, in the time that elapses between a smoker exhaling and a passive smoker inhaling, these condense on other particles and grow sufficiently in size to get deposited in the passive smoker's lungs. Which is what makes passive smoking such a threat to humans! There are of course many other sources of indoor air pollution and I haven't even scratched the surface of this topic. However, I do believe that I will have generated sufficient interest in this topic by this small article for all of you to do some reading on your own. Based on the popularity of this post, I will decide whether to part with some more interesting information! Till then, adieu! :)
/R [My signature!]
Some links for reading up on indoor air pollution
1. http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/airindoorairpollution.html
2. http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages/airindoorenvironmentaltobaccosmoke.html
3. http://www.who.int/indoorair/en/
4.http://www- wds.worldbank.org/external/default/main?pagePK=64193027&piPK=64187937&theSitePK=523679&menuPK=64187510&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679&entityID=000090341_20070606150339&searchMenuPK=64187283&theSitePK=523679
To start with, let me get to pollution in general. Contrary to popular belief, a pollutant is defined as a substance present in excess of its normal concentration in the environment. That means, any substance on this earth has a the potential to be a pollutant, if it is in the wrong place at the wrong time. Air pollution is a serious issue because unlike water and land pollution, physical boundaries are not sufficient to contain it. Pollution, in that sense, is a unifying factor across national and international boundaries! Consider the case in point: rapid industrialization in Germany and France led to Sweden's lakes turning acidic due to acid rain! Now, that is what they mean when they say that the world is getting closer.
Another myth is that CO2 is a pollutant. CO2 is a green house gas and is not a pollutant. CO2 will be called a pollutant if it is present in amounts exceeding 5000ppm and since there are a lot many sinks to this particular gas, there is scant possibility of this gas making it to that high a concentration. Anyway, coming back to the point at hand, we all know what ambient air pollution is. There are standards set by the Central Pollution Control Board [CPCB] which are known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards [NAAQS]. More information can be sought at the website: www.cpcb.nic.in
However, there are no standards prescribed for the indoor environment. Why is this so? Consider the fact that there are at least a million registered and un-registered architects all over the world and each one has her / his own way of designing buildings. Each one gives different weightage to lighting and ventilation factors. Ergo, it becomes difficult to gauge how much air is going into an indoor environment and how much is leaking to the atmosphere from it. Also, the definition of the indoor environment is such that it becomes difficult to make a standard. An indoor environment is any place / location where one is not exposed to the ambient air directly. That means every place, right from schools to cars to trains and aeroplanes fall in this category. That makes a difficult job, that of specifying standards, impossible.
What then, are the sources of indoor air pollution? There are many, and a partial list can be found here: http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages
The cigarette burns at a very high temperature when the smoker inhales and the tip of the cigarette can be at as high a temperature as 900 C. Which probably explains why cigarette burns take so long to heal! Nicotine, the habit forming chemical present in tobacco, does not lead to the production of harmful gases / particulate matter. It is the "tar" present in the tobacco which leads to production of carbon monoxide and carcinogens and poly aromatic hydrocarbos like phenanthrene, flouranthene, etc. Carbon monoxide reduces the oxygen carrying capacity of human blood because it forms an irreversible bond with haemoglobin. Particulate matter settles in the lungs, and cigarette smoke has such small particles that they can deposit in the alveoli, which are the places where gas transfer takes place in the lungs i.e. oxygen is swapped for CO2.
The smoke that a smoker exhales has more of these smaller particles than he / she has himself / herself inhaled, because they are too small to get deposited in the smoker's lungs. However, in the time that elapses between a smoker exhaling and a passive smoker inhaling, these condense on other particles and grow sufficiently in size to get deposited in the passive smoker's lungs. Which is what makes passive smoking such a threat to humans! There are of course many other sources of indoor air pollution and I haven't even scratched the surface of this topic. However, I do believe that I will have generated sufficient interest in this topic by this small article for all of you to do some reading on your own. Based on the popularity of this post, I will decide whether to part with some more interesting information! Till then, adieu! :)
/R [My signature!]
Some links for reading up on indoor air pollution
1. http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages
2. http://www.epa.gov/ebtpages
3. http://www.who.int/indoorair
4.http://www- wds.worldbank.org/external
Saturday, June 23, 2007
Au revoir, Thierry!
I have not been my usual chirpy self lately and M/s Henry and company at Arsenal Football Club are not helping my cause. I mean, if you want a trasnfer to another club that desperately, go get it man! Why are you moving around in the shadows, forcing people to hope against hope that you will remain a Gunner like you promised last year? If you want to renege on your promise, sever the ties in one single slash of the trasnfer sword. Don’t use the slow and painful poison on your own club, which made you a star. The club doesn’t deserve this from its own prodigal son. The problem with prodigal sons is that they soon tire of the doting parents because familiarity breeds contempt. Maybe Henry shouldn’t have been given the special treatment that he got from the club. True, he gave his heart and soul on the pitch in Arsenal colours, but when the time to say Au revoir arose, he chose to do it in such a disgraceful manner. He could have chosen the path that Bergkamp took. He could have gone to another club as quietly as Campbell did. But no, the price of being a star is that you have to have the media present with you 24×7.
And even after all the news that Henry is indeed moving to Spain, there is still that glimmer of hope somewhere in my mind that he may just stay back at The Emirates. I haven’t given up hope of that. Even if he stays, I will always hate him for what he has done over the last month.
Au revoir, Thierry. And if you do want out, please get out as soon as possible. Please don’t jeopardize the club’s and the team’s morale any more.
And even after all the news that Henry is indeed moving to Spain, there is still that glimmer of hope somewhere in my mind that he may just stay back at The Emirates. I haven’t given up hope of that. Even if he stays, I will always hate him for what he has done over the last month.
Au revoir, Thierry. And if you do want out, please get out as soon as possible. Please don’t jeopardize the club’s and the team’s morale any more.
Saturday, June 16, 2007
Football Shutball! Hai Rabba!!!
That is exactly what I am saying these days. Considering the fact that I have my final submissions looming ahead of me, I find it a tad difficult to keep up with happenings in the transfer market and the world of EPL. Sure, Man Utd. have gone ahead and copied Wenger’s style of signing young lads from Europe. And Chelsea have suddenly tightened their purse strings. I think that has something to do with the impending court cases they are bound to face if the allegations about player transfers are found to be true. Haven’t had time to read into that. Maybe will do that once my submissions are over. Wenger is on a vacation and he needs to be because he doesn’t have my counsel for making prudent purchases! :) :D
More when I return from the tedium of report writing!
More when I return from the tedium of report writing!
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Mumbai will have a Metro
For a lighter take on this issue you may want to visit : Random musings of a Questioning mind (Content Advisory : May contain booger humour. Visit at your own risk. Readers are cautioned that they will probably need to use shampoos to grow their hair back, once they are done pulling them out after reading the blog!)
Mumbai is the city of dreams. Nowhere in the country will anyone find such a plethora of opportunities nestled in such small a place. It is the city which the nation looks up to for its growth, prosperity and its generosity. It will not be unfair to say that Mumbai is because of its people. People from all walks of life, all parts of the nation and all ages are what make Mumbai this special. People, who are willing to work that extra bit to make sure that their families remain well fed and their children can be educated so that they don't have to eke out a living as miserably. People, who commute absurd distances to reach their place of work, in the hope that some day their plight will be understood by the powers that be and they might get redemption in the form of a few extra local trains at the peak hours.
These are the people who will be the most thrilled at the prospect of Mumbai getting a metro. While the current layout of the metro is not exactly suited for the people of suburbs commuting downtown, it is nevertheless a beginning for a better travel facilities for the city that gives so much to the nation and asks for so less in return. A plan (proposed) for the metro is as shown below:
Image Source : (http://urbanrail.net/as/mumb/mumbai.htm)
The right to information act for the Mumbai Urban Transport Project yields the following:
http://www.mrvc.gov.in/tenderphp/admin/upright/summary.pdf
As things stand, the project is going to benefit the people who currently use the roadways connecting the east-west corridor (horrible state of affairs) and the already cosseted western corridor of the city. I fail to understand why the majority of the city's construction fund is diverted to the west. A significant amount of the working population of the city resides in the central suburbs. The western suburbs already have the western railways, the western express highway and the new and upcoming Bandra - Worli Sea Link. This is grossly unfair for the denizens of the central corridor. Not that I hear them complaining. But they have always been the proletariat as opposed to the upper class bourgeois of the western suburbs.
As I foresee, the Mumbai Metro is going to have the following effects:
1. The Western Suburbs will prosper
The western suburbs already are in the cream of things. The locus in quo the western denizens reside is already served by buses, railways and private vehicles to the point of overflowing. Yet, they are the recipients of the latest improvement in the urban transportation. Yes, they deserve better transportation to an extent, because they are the so-called business class of the city as opposed to the worker class of the central line. However, such an unfair distribution of benefits smacks of something more than simple preference for the western side.
2. Mumbai will be more crowded
This is slightly debatable. However, it is not so hard to believe if you follow the following line of thought:
Everyday, there is an influx of people into Mumbai. And everyday, some people leave Mumbai for the better (implausible I know, but just assume it to be so) Given the state of Mumbai's infrastructure right now, there are many people who are definitely considering leaving Mumbai as part of their retirement plans. A calculation will show that the limiting population, with respect to water and power requirements per capita, will be achieved within twenty years at the current rate of influx. Consider this in the light of improved transportation in the city and this will lead to a greater influx of people, thereby resulting in the limiting population being reached in somewhere between 8 to 10 years, after the completion of the MUTP. These are rough, back of the envelope calculations. However, I believe they should be sufficient to convince rational people that Mumbai is going to get further crowded!
3. More tourists
Better transportation with world class facilities can mean only one thing : more tourists. Which also means more and more stories of cons, rapes and the other malarkey that usually follows tourists around. There is also the matter of increased foreign exchange and increased rock concerts! :-)
All in all, the metro is a welcome thing. It will serve the needs of the people wanting to go from say Mulund to Borivali (a journey which takes two hours at peak hours, minimum) in a jiffy. However, to what extent it will change the fate of Mumbai's ever growing populace will only be told by time.
Mumbai is the city of dreams. Nowhere in the country will anyone find such a plethora of opportunities nestled in such small a place. It is the city which the nation looks up to for its growth, prosperity and its generosity. It will not be unfair to say that Mumbai is because of its people. People from all walks of life, all parts of the nation and all ages are what make Mumbai this special. People, who are willing to work that extra bit to make sure that their families remain well fed and their children can be educated so that they don't have to eke out a living as miserably. People, who commute absurd distances to reach their place of work, in the hope that some day their plight will be understood by the powers that be and they might get redemption in the form of a few extra local trains at the peak hours.
These are the people who will be the most thrilled at the prospect of Mumbai getting a metro. While the current layout of the metro is not exactly suited for the people of suburbs commuting downtown, it is nevertheless a beginning for a better travel facilities for the city that gives so much to the nation and asks for so less in return. A plan (proposed) for the metro is as shown below:
Image Source : (http://urbanrail.net/as/mumb/mumbai.htm)The right to information act for the Mumbai Urban Transport Project yields the following:
http://www.mrvc.gov.in/tenderphp/admin/upright/summary.pdf
As things stand, the project is going to benefit the people who currently use the roadways connecting the east-west corridor (horrible state of affairs) and the already cosseted western corridor of the city. I fail to understand why the majority of the city's construction fund is diverted to the west. A significant amount of the working population of the city resides in the central suburbs. The western suburbs already have the western railways, the western express highway and the new and upcoming Bandra - Worli Sea Link. This is grossly unfair for the denizens of the central corridor. Not that I hear them complaining. But they have always been the proletariat as opposed to the upper class bourgeois of the western suburbs.
As I foresee, the Mumbai Metro is going to have the following effects:
1. The Western Suburbs will prosper
The western suburbs already are in the cream of things. The locus in quo the western denizens reside is already served by buses, railways and private vehicles to the point of overflowing. Yet, they are the recipients of the latest improvement in the urban transportation. Yes, they deserve better transportation to an extent, because they are the so-called business class of the city as opposed to the worker class of the central line. However, such an unfair distribution of benefits smacks of something more than simple preference for the western side.
2. Mumbai will be more crowded
This is slightly debatable. However, it is not so hard to believe if you follow the following line of thought:
Everyday, there is an influx of people into Mumbai. And everyday, some people leave Mumbai for the better (implausible I know, but just assume it to be so) Given the state of Mumbai's infrastructure right now, there are many people who are definitely considering leaving Mumbai as part of their retirement plans. A calculation will show that the limiting population, with respect to water and power requirements per capita, will be achieved within twenty years at the current rate of influx. Consider this in the light of improved transportation in the city and this will lead to a greater influx of people, thereby resulting in the limiting population being reached in somewhere between 8 to 10 years, after the completion of the MUTP. These are rough, back of the envelope calculations. However, I believe they should be sufficient to convince rational people that Mumbai is going to get further crowded!
3. More tourists
Better transportation with world class facilities can mean only one thing : more tourists. Which also means more and more stories of cons, rapes and the other malarkey that usually follows tourists around. There is also the matter of increased foreign exchange and increased rock concerts! :-)
All in all, the metro is a welcome thing. It will serve the needs of the people wanting to go from say Mulund to Borivali (a journey which takes two hours at peak hours, minimum) in a jiffy. However, to what extent it will change the fate of Mumbai's ever growing populace will only be told by time.
Saturday, November 11, 2006
Beauty and the Beast - Part Two
The last time I had written an article titled "Beauty and the Beast" it was a movie review of King Kong. While the premise is the same, the movie this time is very varied in its style and substance. The movie in question this time around is, hold your breaths, Gangster.
I know, some people are probably sniggering. Yeah right, you are saying. How can you even compare the two movies? Well, I am not comparing the movies. I am saying that the underlying principle of these two is the same and that is exactly the title of this article.
Gangster is the story of Daya : a simple guy from a small village in Kashmir, who grows up to become a key cog in the underworld. He is constantly on the run from the police and it is during one such escapade that he runs into Simran, the femme fatale. He is flabbergasted by her beauty and therein starts the love between them. She is taken aback by certain chivalrous stunts he performs and we have the premise for a love story in the protagonists' life. Certain incidents force them to "adopt" a child and during an encounter, the child loses its life. This leads to the estrangement of the hero and his love.
Separated, they begin to lead their lives in the hope of someday being able to see each other. Simran becomes an alcoholic and seeks the company of Akaash, a singer at a local restaurant. Love blossoms again as Akaash inveigles Simran to accepting his proposal with visions of grandeur and a "settled" life. Daya chooses this exact moment to drop in, thereby sending Simran's plans haywire. He concedes that Simran would be better off with Akaash, but asks her to give him a last chance to prove that he has turned over a new leaf. To this she agrees.
Daya's past however refuses to lie down. He gets chased by police wherever he goes, much like fans chasing Amitabh Bacchan all around Mumbai, with the exception being that fans probably seek an autograph, whereas the police seek Daya's finger-prints i.e. the DEAD Daya's fingerprints! In this pandemonium, Simran realizes (surprise, surprise) that she is pregnant with Akaash's child. Akaash, the goodie two shoes, asks her to hand over Daya to the cops and lead a "happily ever after" life with him. Simran's dreams are dashed when she realizes that the guy she has duped had changed his life for the better and the guy she hoped to "settle" down with her that duped her. This aptly sums up the slogan line of the movie : She fell in love with him the day she betrayed him.
The scene in which the cops separate Daya from Simran is particularly touching. We see a hysterical Daya, bewildered at the thought of being separated from his love and feeling a tad depressed because of the fact that she let him down. This is why, I once again repeat the famous words of Carl Denham (Jack Black) from the movie King Kong : "It wasn't the air-planes that killed him. It was beauty that killed the beast." The femme fatale in this case leads our protagonist to the gallows and ends up joining him up there / down there according to your preference. In the meanwhile, she also manages to finish off Akaash.
All in all, a slightly depressing movie, what with the theatricals the actor who plays Simran's role goes through in an effort to make her role seem natural. I think someone else should have been handed that role. Someone who would be less willing to let her clothes off on screen and a bit more willing to act the part of the character that she is supposed to be. Shiney Ahuja is a revelation and he should refrain from scenes which require him to cry. As for Emraan Hashmi, well, he pulls off his role to a perfection. One has to admit that he can do the job of the bad-guy really well. Gulshan Grover does well in a cameo appearance. The sound track is good and although I have heard from sources that the music has been ripped from all over the world, the songs make for good listening, anyway. And the most attractive part about them is that they are unobtrusive in the movie. The movie moves along at a good pace and finishes within two hours. All in all, good value for money. To be avoided if you are the "core" hindi movie fan.
I know, some people are probably sniggering. Yeah right, you are saying. How can you even compare the two movies? Well, I am not comparing the movies. I am saying that the underlying principle of these two is the same and that is exactly the title of this article.
Gangster is the story of Daya : a simple guy from a small village in Kashmir, who grows up to become a key cog in the underworld. He is constantly on the run from the police and it is during one such escapade that he runs into Simran, the femme fatale. He is flabbergasted by her beauty and therein starts the love between them. She is taken aback by certain chivalrous stunts he performs and we have the premise for a love story in the protagonists' life. Certain incidents force them to "adopt" a child and during an encounter, the child loses its life. This leads to the estrangement of the hero and his love.
Separated, they begin to lead their lives in the hope of someday being able to see each other. Simran becomes an alcoholic and seeks the company of Akaash, a singer at a local restaurant. Love blossoms again as Akaash inveigles Simran to accepting his proposal with visions of grandeur and a "settled" life. Daya chooses this exact moment to drop in, thereby sending Simran's plans haywire. He concedes that Simran would be better off with Akaash, but asks her to give him a last chance to prove that he has turned over a new leaf. To this she agrees.
Daya's past however refuses to lie down. He gets chased by police wherever he goes, much like fans chasing Amitabh Bacchan all around Mumbai, with the exception being that fans probably seek an autograph, whereas the police seek Daya's finger-prints i.e. the DEAD Daya's fingerprints! In this pandemonium, Simran realizes (surprise, surprise) that she is pregnant with Akaash's child. Akaash, the goodie two shoes, asks her to hand over Daya to the cops and lead a "happily ever after" life with him. Simran's dreams are dashed when she realizes that the guy she has duped had changed his life for the better and the guy she hoped to "settle" down with her that duped her. This aptly sums up the slogan line of the movie : She fell in love with him the day she betrayed him.
The scene in which the cops separate Daya from Simran is particularly touching. We see a hysterical Daya, bewildered at the thought of being separated from his love and feeling a tad depressed because of the fact that she let him down. This is why, I once again repeat the famous words of Carl Denham (Jack Black) from the movie King Kong : "It wasn't the air-planes that killed him. It was beauty that killed the beast." The femme fatale in this case leads our protagonist to the gallows and ends up joining him up there / down there according to your preference. In the meanwhile, she also manages to finish off Akaash.
All in all, a slightly depressing movie, what with the theatricals the actor who plays Simran's role goes through in an effort to make her role seem natural. I think someone else should have been handed that role. Someone who would be less willing to let her clothes off on screen and a bit more willing to act the part of the character that she is supposed to be. Shiney Ahuja is a revelation and he should refrain from scenes which require him to cry. As for Emraan Hashmi, well, he pulls off his role to a perfection. One has to admit that he can do the job of the bad-guy really well. Gulshan Grover does well in a cameo appearance. The sound track is good and although I have heard from sources that the music has been ripped from all over the world, the songs make for good listening, anyway. And the most attractive part about them is that they are unobtrusive in the movie. The movie moves along at a good pace and finishes within two hours. All in all, good value for money. To be avoided if you are the "core" hindi movie fan.
Saturday, August 19, 2006
Breakfast with Dr. Smith
Dr. Kirk R Smith. What do you say about the doyen of Indoor Air Pollution research? I am, for a change, speechless. Also, nervous, apprehensive, edgy, tense and uneasy. I haven't slept properly. I was awake all night wondering what I am going to discuss with him. I have just stepped into the world which he has created painstakingly and over a period of 27 years. I am but a small ant in his universe. And yet he has very generously agreed to meet me. What should I expect to hear from him? Will I be too awe-struck? Later on, will I remember anything from the conversation that I will have with him? I don't know. Well, in case you people are wondering why I am so flabbergasted at the prospect of meeting this person, check out http://ehs.sph.berkeley.edu/krsmith/page.asp?id=2
He is to Indoor Air Pollution work what Einstein was to Photoelectric effect. If it weren't for Einstein, we wouldn't have has printers and photocopying "xerox" machines today. Similarly, we owe a lot to Dr. Smith for our current knowledge of the health effects of indoor air pollution. And I am about to meet him. The rendezvous is at 0800hrs at the Guest House. Wish me luck, people.
He is to Indoor Air Pollution work what Einstein was to Photoelectric effect. If it weren't for Einstein, we wouldn't have has printers and photocopying "xerox" machines today. Similarly, we owe a lot to Dr. Smith for our current knowledge of the health effects of indoor air pollution. And I am about to meet him. The rendezvous is at 0800hrs at the Guest House. Wish me luck, people.
Wednesday, July 12, 2006
Mumbai
To an astute observer, this would seem a city of nightmares, rather than dreams. This city has seen everything : from floods due to torrential rains to power cuts in peak summer time. From bandhs in the city to blasts in local trains. And yet, there are people like me, who still believe that this is the city of dreams. And not nightmares. Mr. Astute Observer, you are mistaken. And here is the reason why.
1. Can you tell me Mr. A. O., which other city can regroup as quickly and return to work as quickly as Mumbai can?
2. Can you, Mr. A. O., find another such place where people go out of the way to distribute food packets, water bottles, and other small (but necessary) miscellany to complete strangers? (Damn the Reader's Digest report. It was all crap anyway.)
3. Another thing, Mr. A. O. Which metropolis has gone through all that Mumbai has and still come out tops (and with a weathered, if only a bit wry smile on its face)?
The question that still rankles in the minds of all the average Mumbaikars though is "Why us?". Haven't we got enough to already chew upon? We've got corrupt politicians, a rubbish media, bad roads, insincere officials, drugs, cigarettes, poor public transport (which got even poorer by the latest addition to its services : improvized explosive devices (ied)) and other hassles to handle. Why torment us with additional misfortunes? Why barrage us with the occasional, more often than not, bandh, blasphemy, blast? Why is that we still live in "BOMB"ay and not Mumbai? Do we need to look within to find answers? I suspect not.
There are other places to look at. Other people to blame. For now, in the time of need, the spirit of Mumbai will reveal itself. We will move on. Those unfortunate enough to have not made it to another day in this splendid city will be missed. I am sure that they would have wanted us to carry on anyway. The way they themselves did all their lives : clinging to the local trains that were their daily partners.
1. Can you tell me Mr. A. O., which other city can regroup as quickly and return to work as quickly as Mumbai can?
2. Can you, Mr. A. O., find another such place where people go out of the way to distribute food packets, water bottles, and other small (but necessary) miscellany to complete strangers? (Damn the Reader's Digest report. It was all crap anyway.)
3. Another thing, Mr. A. O. Which metropolis has gone through all that Mumbai has and still come out tops (and with a weathered, if only a bit wry smile on its face)?
The question that still rankles in the minds of all the average Mumbaikars though is "Why us?". Haven't we got enough to already chew upon? We've got corrupt politicians, a rubbish media, bad roads, insincere officials, drugs, cigarettes, poor public transport (which got even poorer by the latest addition to its services : improvized explosive devices (ied)) and other hassles to handle. Why torment us with additional misfortunes? Why barrage us with the occasional, more often than not, bandh, blasphemy, blast? Why is that we still live in "BOMB"ay and not Mumbai? Do we need to look within to find answers? I suspect not.
There are other places to look at. Other people to blame. For now, in the time of need, the spirit of Mumbai will reveal itself. We will move on. Those unfortunate enough to have not made it to another day in this splendid city will be missed. I am sure that they would have wanted us to carry on anyway. The way they themselves did all their lives : clinging to the local trains that were their daily partners.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)