You are currently browsing the monthly archive for June 2011.
On Imran Khan’s statement against the proposed drinking age of 25 in Maharashtra, regular reader and commenter Anonymous writes in:
Well… Imran Khan also has a movie releasing in the next week. Don’t mean to be a cynic, but the timing of the PIL seems a bit self-serving.
Anyhow, hopefully the sentiments and intentions are as honest as the words are true.
To this I say: So what?
[Source]
Organisers of India’s first ‘SlutWalk’ have rebranded the event. The name has now been changed to ‘Besharmi Morcha’ which means ‘Shameless Protest’.
The organisers feel that not all people in the national capital will understand the meaning of the word ‘slut’. And more importantly may misinterpret the usage of the word. The organisers have finally settled down for ‘Besharmi Morcha’.
That’s good news.
***
On that note, I saw this headline in my RSS feed but CNN-IBN appear to have taken it down since:
I believe it was taken down because it was distasteful. But wasn’t that the whole point of SlutWalk: Reclaiming the word and its connotation? I thought headstrong, independent women wanted to be called sluts.
Just another reason why this feminist movement by women confuses me. I tell you, men are far more capable of handling this feminist movement.
I just saw the first episode of Coke Studio India. Watch it and download the music if you like it.
I’m afraid that if I make this post any longer, I’ll end up writing something scathing. And I don’t want to go back to the days of judging stuff. In one non-critical sentence: I did not expect what I saw; it’s not for me; I’m real happy the artists are having a blast.
Maharashtra has raised the drinking age to 25. Actor Imran Khan (the Indian one) has the balls to stand up and file a PIL against the government:
The actor said that more than 60% of the population is below 25. “When one gets the right to vote at 18 and elect a government and even marry and have children at the age 21, to ban drinking for people below the age of 25 is ridiculous,” said Khan.
While the actor personally does not endorse drinking, he said, “I feel everyone has the right to choose and that is the reason why I have decided to take this step. I don’t think it should be imposed upon the youth. This kind of regulation is bound to turn the youth into outlaws.”
Could that be said any better?
Until I get over this phase of not wanting to blog (which I’m told by me can end any moment), I am going to be lazy and link to really good posts.
Here’s one by Neo Indian titled Why You Should Read The Vedas, And Why The Religious Will Never Understand Them.
You should read the Vedas because they are deeply real, deeply flawed, and because they describe the first and perhaps the most genuine of human epiphanies: that there might be no answers, only beautiful questions.
“… But, after all, who knows, and who can say
Whence it all came, and how creation happened?
the gods themselves are later than creation,
so who knows truly whence it has arisen?
Whence all creation had its origin,
he, whether he fashioned it or whether he did not,
he, who surveys it all from highest heaven,
he knows – or maybe even he does not know.”
—Nāsadīya Sūkta, 129th sūkta of the 10th mandala, Rigveda
[This, of course, is the verse made famous by the title track of Bharat Ek Khoj. The track is one of my favourites. I have uploaded it for those of you who don't have it.]
Neo makes a great argument for reading ancient texts with the most important caveat: Do not listen to religious folks, especially those who dissuade you from reading them as sources of half-knowledge.
If you are an atheist, I believe you are better qualified to read texts like the Gita because you can easily cut through all the — for lack of a better word — bullsh*t. [Tip: Avoid versions published by ISKCON.] You can read texts like they were intended to be read. And let’s face it: you can’t possibly have a worse interpretation of the texts than how contemporary religion has evolved from arguably the same texts. Even with half-knowledge, I can guarantee that you won’t be burning gays or buying Groupons for bomb-making classes.
For their time, the Vedas and texts like the Gita were highly intellectual and in many, many, many instances, even for our time. And I’m going to turn the argument 180 degrees around and say that it is vital — according to me — to only take half-knowledge from them.
If you want a sneak peek into the kitchen-rules of a TamBrahm household, this is a good post. Each time a friend comes across these posts, I’m asked whether it’s all true. As a rule of thumb for TamBrahm households, if it’s crazy it is true.
Link via Atul M.
On the topic of Babas fasting for causes, here’s one who died while fasting to save the Ganga.
I know it’d make him happy if we gave him and his cause the fifteen seconds of fame.
****
This news in invariably going to cause someone to compare Ramdev and the above Baba. But each time I read someone opine that we ought to talk about Irom Sharmila and not about Anna Hazare, I’m reminded that I need to read smarter folks and not them.
The usual Jesus-on-a-toast news:
An Italian space buff has claimed to have spotted the face of Mahatma Gandhi etched into the the rocks of Mars while scanning through latest pictures of the Red Planet.
It goes on to say:
Seeing faces on Mars is a case of pareidolia – where a random stimulus is perceived as having significance, be it a symbol seen in a cloud or a face on a piece of toast.
This sentence might just have described religion.
Or I’m wrong and Allah is indeed our god and created the universe.
****
And speaking of Gandhi, his spectacles were stolen from Sewagram Ashram in Wardha. The theft is being duly reported but let’s face it: It’s not like he needs them anyway.
Pune’s MLA Ramesh Wanjale (MNS) dies.
[Guess he didn't get that Ph.D. after all.]
A Delhi artist paints Arundhati Roy nude, in bed with Chairman Mao and Osama bin Laden.
Says it’s his way of protesting against the Booker-winning author for supporting Naxals and Kashmiri separatists.
These strokes are enough to give conventionalists a stroke. A naked Arundhati Roy caresses herself as she enjoys a threesome with the two blood thirsty figures of history, Mao and Osama bin Laden, and a voyeur-loving skull looks over their shoulder.
Artist Pranava Prakash’s ’Goddess of Fifteen Minutes of Fame’ sure promises him more than that, as the painter, who was last in news for his controversial nude painting of MF Husain, this time takes on the case of the activist-author as fearlessly as his subject herself.
Further, he goes on to call Arundhati Roy a publicity seeker. (Yes, the irony.)
’Publicity-seeker’
“Arundhati represents all the intellectuals who are selfless promoters of all sorts of causes which can give them publicity. They are dancing to the tune of publicity as a hungry monkey dances to the tune of its master for a banana,” explains the painter. He goes on to reason why communist leader Mao and Taliban mastermind Laden needed to be in bed with her: “Arundhati was seen supporting ruthless Naxalites in their war against innocent Indian citizens and then she was hobnobbing with merciless Kashmiri killers who were remorseless in their act.”
As a painter, he should have the freedom of expression. Unlimited freedom also separates the good from the bad, the wise from the foolish.
I found his paintings in bad taste because for him, nudity is an expression of revenge. (He has painted M.F. Husain in the nude too.) He doesn’t appear to use nudity to show his subjects in their purest form — he doesn’t even claim to do so. His reason for nudity is spite. It is bad art, and not because nudity must only be used to show purity, but because doing anything with a deeper thought process adds creativity. His art lacks that layer.
***
Popular opinion is that Arundhati Roy is a publicity seeking celebrity (the contradiction) but I for one am convinced that she truly believes what she says. Her opinions might not be agreeable but I don’t have any reason to disbelieve her intentions. Her intentions, as far as she is concerned, are noble. And we ought to grant this to those we disagree with. We are often too busy in finding hidden intentions and meanings in places where the intentions are noble but we disagree with the opinion.
[An excellent example is the recent Paul Ryan budget proposal that would've caused a major change to Medicare. When President Obama was asked about it, he did not resort to calling Ryan an elitist who wanted to end Medicare and didn't care about the poor -- the low hanging fruit his Democratic colleagues are taking. Obama said that Ryan's intentions were noble and he had every reason to believe Ryan truly believed in his own ideology. It's just that Ryan's ideology conflicted with Obama's. So he disagreed with Ryan's budget proposal.
Just one more reason why Obama -- with his flaws -- deserves to be President over other clowns in the arena.]
