Thursday, March 28, 2013

Whats so special?



Much has been made of demanding a special status for Bihar by the current CM Nitish Kumar, where he hints that he will align with any party for the forthcoming elections in 2014 that gives it to his state. But the migration of Biharis to other parts of India has reached such scary proportions that actually the states to where Biharis migrate would need a special status not long from now.

Bihari migrants, along with their Uttar Pradesh counterparts, have faced a lot of hostility, among others ,in Assam , Punjab ,Maharashtra, Bengal , Andhra Pradesh and Tamil Nadu , the most  horrific of them are the numerous incidents of massacre of Bihari labourers by ULFA or by the Khalistani militants during Punjab insurgency. But the other instances are for largely valid reasons, the chief among them being utter disregard (and at times , contempt) by the migrants for the culture and language of the states they have migrated to, the utter lack of will or desire to assimilate, the pressure put on civic amenities due to uncontrolled migration (most acutely seen in Mumbai and Delhi), the frequency of the migrants to fall in the ways of crime (The bulk of Dawood gang footsoldiers were recruited from UP for one example) and so on.

The attacks of Uttar Pradesh of Bihari migrants by the likes of Shiv Sena and MNS are quickly dubbed by the media as “attacks on north Indians”, conveniently forgetting that its not all north Indians who are facing the ire. Rajasthanis and Punjabis are spread across the country as well. Why don’t they face similar kind of anger? Because they assimilate and respect the culture of their adopted states. That’s one fact the media conveniently chooses to ignore (It also forgets that Biharis cannot be called as north Indians as Bihar is in the east of the country).

Before crying foul, the self righteous bleeding hearts and every denizen of Bihar and UP must ask and try to answer honestly the following:-
Why are these two  politically significant states  developmentally so insignificant in comparison? How long will they continue to be referred to as bimaru (sick) or cow belt regions?
Why is it that inspite of having nearly one fourth of the country’s population, the contribution of Uttar Pradesh or Bihar to India’s progress has been miniscule in comparison to the magnitude of human capital available in there?

 Why is it that inspite of a combined total of 112 out of the 545 seats in Lok Sabha, both these states are abysmal in every aspect of human development index? Take anything, right from law and order to infrastructure and there is nothing hopeful which can be seen in them.
Why is it repeated all the time that “any citizen has a right to work anywhere in the country” but it is never stressed that it is the moral responsibility of those in power to create ample opportunities for all citizens to find meaningful means of living in their own city, district or state?
Bihar produces the most number of civil servants in the country. No wonder it is in such a bad shape. Uttar Pradesh, which is not very far from the number is no better. But why have these two states since independence not produced  a single leader or technocrat who can create jobs, spur development and bring the populace out of misery?

Cant these two states produce one political figure who is not a criminal? Why is every other politician from there nothing more than a caste leader or a warlord like figure whose only capability lies in the number of armed people and sycophants he has at his command? (Of course it is not restricted to he) Why cant the people who proudly vote for them as their “biradari waala” or “hamaara neta” once pause to think that can their idol ever due anything fruitful for them in the long run? There is no right, left or centre in Indian politics. There is only caste. But this problem is  most chronic in these two states.

Why cant someone in the media have the guts to say that vote bank castist politics have calculatedly driven out the majority of the middle class out of Bihar? How long must the college graduates and labourers go halfway across India for even getting the most simplest of employment and labour, respectively? Don’t they have a right to have a right of dignified life in their native place?

Have the people and leaders of UP and Bihar sworn that they will live a much more miserable life than rest of India? A developed India is simply impossible without a developed UP and Bihar.How long will they continue to be a deadweight that sinks everyone down? How long will they continue voting shameless opportunists to power who hold the country to ransom on the flimsiest of issues and can swing any way, depending on who pays them the most?

Instead of getting angry at MNS , why cant the people of UP and Bihar ever question themselves that for how long will they have the attitude of being stuck behind and dragging the whole country down with them  for their caste based politics and sheer inability to progress?
As for the special status, what has it done for any state that has got them? Hand outs never help anyone, they only create a juvenile sense of entitlement, something which, thanks to the socialist policies has become frightfully abundant in the country.Uttar Pradesh and Bihar have got enough spent on them over the years, and where has all this money gone? Down the drain or into the pockets of robbers and bandits who have been elected to represent the people, thereby leaving the majority of the area as a squalid wasteland and forcing the denizens of UP and Bihar to migrate even to seek meaningful menial employment elsewhere.How long will they be continued to be labelled as Bhaiyyas and nothing else?

Mr Nitish Kumar, special status wont get you anything but a few alms and few more decades of misery. Inspire people to become special instead. That’s the only way out.

Is it too much to ask for?


Friday, March 8, 2013

Awarding excellence or encouraging promotion?



The 85th Academy awards again proved what the 84 ceremonies before it had proven in some or a large amount:- Its not always the best that get awarded, but the best lobbied. And this is unlikely to change in the near future.

Although back in India where film awards are a joke that are sponsored by film magazines that are a bigger joke, the Oscars might seem a whole new level altogether, but the fact remains that each ceremony makes you question the jury that awards them.

Positive things first.Seth MacFarlane. Yes, the loud mouthed host comedian who spared no corner unturned in ridiculing Hollywood and exposing the hypocrisy which always gets passed off as style. Or his ode to female nudity onscreen, We saw your b**s. Though it might have got the bleeding hearts enraged, he merely sung humourously what actress had exposed her assets in what film, a choice she had consciously made when she signed for the role. Many actresses and actors in their struggling days resort to acting in raunchy films or videos and then try to have them swept under the carpet when they find success. If this kind of double standards can be accepted then its surprising why Seth is attacked for singing the history of assets display onscreen. It was great to see a host unbound by any censored straightjacket.


Then there was Daniel Day Lewis, arguably the finest actor of his generation and certainly the best method actor ever , receiving his record third Oscar for best actor for his superb portrayal of Abraham Lincoln in Lincoln. His humble and refreshing acceptance speech should be a lesson for upstart starlets who have taken narcissism to their very DNA.


But then, not everything is just in the Oscars.

Starting with the snubs. Appalling is the word to describe how Paul Thomas Anderson and Ben Affleck were not nominated for best director, for The Master and Argo, respectively. Similar is the exclusion of The Master from best picture category(while a typical not so novel romantic comedy like Silver Linings Playbook was nominated heavily) ,maybe not to ruffle the feathers of the scientologists.Such behavior is not new with the Oscars, which did not even nominate Jack Nicolson for his role as Frank Costello in The Departed or Lee Emery’s role of Sgt Hartman in Full Metal Jacket for Supporting Actor nor they  deemed necessary to award the works of people like Stanley Kubrick, Sidney Lumet, Satyajit Ray, Alfred Hitchcock or Steve McQueen . This is the Academy which couldn’t find any worthiness in Robert De Niro’s Travis Bickle in Taxi Driver,  nor in the numerous great roles of Paul Newman and Peter O’Toole in more than three decades,  made the great Martin Scorsese wait for more than thirty years, rejecting his directing efforts in Raging Bull for Ordinary People,  Goodfellas for Dances with Wolves. When he finally won best director for The Departed, he sarcastically asked for the envelope to be checked again.

Now the wins, starting from the Best Director, painfully given to Ang Lee for Life of Pi, over the much superior work of Steven Spielberg and Michael Haneke for Lincoln and Amour, respectively. Life of Pi, minus its great visual effects, has very little left. It reduced Hinduism to an exotic belief and portrayed Indians speaking nothing more than an irritating accent of English. Ang Lee did not do enough research to rectify Yan Martel’s biggest mistake- Patel is not a Tamil surname. But then, this is the Academy which honoured that abominable insult of India called Slumdog Millionaire not very long ago. And winning the best visual effects for Life of Pi did not save the vfx studio Rhythm & Hues involved in it from bankruptcy. When Bill Westenhofer, one of the winners for the visual effects team brought out their plight in his acceptance speech, his voice was drowned by increasing the background music and the microphone was shut down. This is compassion, Hollywood style.


In best actress category, it will be honest to say that Emanuelle Riva was robbed off her award. Yes, Jennifer Lawrence is the best young talent in Hollywood today, but she was nowhere in comparison to Riva in Amour and was clearly overshadowed by Robert De Niro and Bradley Cooper in Silver Linings Playbook, a film, which certainly did not deserve so many nominations because it is not very different from the numerous rom coms that have been churned out by the tons. This Academy Awards saw the return of big studios and the lobbying for this film is one of the biggest example. Amour was a very serious, more realistic look at old age and the resulting invalidity. But then, love between people who look good for the camera will always be promoted more than the faithful love of decades that has stood the test of time. Hence the end result.

In supporting cast category, Anne Hathaway won over much better performances, namely from Amy Adams in The Master and  Sally Field in Lincoln. Christoph Waltz was great as King Schultz, but certainly no greater than Tommy Lee Jones’s Thaddeus Stevens or Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Lancaster Dodd.Neither was Django’s original screenplay better than that of Flight. But this is a world where Shakespeare in Love beats Saving Private Ryan and Robert Benigni (Life is Beautiful)beats Edward Norton (American History X) and Chicago beats The Pianist.

But the real show was the surprise appearance of First Lady Michelle Obama to award Argo the best picture. A film about rescuing American citizens from Iran of 1979 getting its Oscar announced by the US first lady. Clearly, nothing political about it.

Looking at the trends of the Oscars over the years, there are a few set patterns that can result in Oscar wins:-

Playing a historical character,may it be a popular or a controversial figure

Pretty ladies becoming ugly and unsightly for the role

Playing a mentally or physically disabled person

A holocaust film.

Playing a role totally opposed to one’s image.

When everything fails, play a gay character. Works all the time.

What does the Academy do when there are not very great performances in a particular year? Easy. Award it to a fair performance of  some old actor,whos better work  nominated several times earlier and always overlooked (Paul Newman in Colour of Money, Jeff Bridges in Crazy Heart). Sometimes, even that isn’t necessary (Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side).

Such are the dubious ways of the glam world. But we will still tune into next years awards and the next to next years as well, cause, there aint no business like show business.