Love: Comic Sans Serif

Ages since I posted... well, you can say that I was literally swept of my feet. I'll save that story for another post. All I can say is that the final days of my semester saw myself in the flotsam of mess of things, suitcases, blankets, pillows, winter clothing, utensils, some of which I left behind in the cozy apartment in Aarhus.... A blotched visa was all I needed as cherry topping to this glorious mess of life.

Anyway, in between all this crazy travelling souvenirs are things we cherish. I had been collecting key chains from Paris, a Norwegian gloves from Oslo, but I found an interesting one at the Gothenburg Art Museum, Sweden. It would be nice to mention here that the Gothenburg Museum of Art has been awarded, a well deserved three stars in the Michelin Guide. After taking in all the Swedish and Dutch artists the museum had to offer, I strolled into the souvenir shop. Just when I thought that I wan't motivated enough to buy a souvenir, my eyes fell on an interesting title- Angry Little Girls in Love -by Lela Lee; a comic book, bande dessinee. Flipping through its glossy pages I found that the comic book was exactly what I wanted in life.

Consider this:

Boy: Should we order dessert?

Girl: Might as well. It may be the only sweetness you'll get tonight.

OR

Girl: I keep meeting the wrong guys when will I meet 'the one'?
Boy: May be you meet the wrong guys so that when you do meet 'the one' you know and be grateful?

Girl: But when?
Boy: I don't know. May be tomorrow May be next year. May be in 8 years no one knows.

Girl: I hate the search for love. It's so disrepectful of my schedule

OR

Boy: Are you with me because I am cute or are you with me because I'm buff?
Girl: No, Nope!
Boy: Then why are you with me?
Girl: Because we have so many faults in common.

Boy: ??

Trust comics to simplify life.

The Antichrist = the feminine?

I had been trying to avoid it, considering my sensitivity to violence and horror, but it is difficult to be in Denmark and miss The Antichrist for all the attention it has attracted in Cannes for its sadist violence. I am sure everyone has read the reviews by now and got a hang the story. It has been described as "a psychological thriller that evolves into a horror film" by Trier himself.
The film begins with some beautiful scenes of lovemaking in black and white but turns morbid in the woods as it switches to colour. Perhaps an indication that lovemaking is simple but its consequences are not. A couple William Dafoe and Charlotte Gainsbourg move to their forest cabin "Eden". The husband (they don't seem to have names) aims to help his wife to recover from the grief of the loss of their son. However, She seems to be going on a different psychological train. As the film progresses one gets into Her psyche who in the past has felt neglected and trivialised by Him. There is a mention of Her Phd thesis on women and sorcery that was termed as 'glib' by Him. There is one scene where He seems to be admonishing Her for not being critical of her texts. There is another wherein, She accuses him "of being distant from their son Nic, who died, and one where she says "I have never interested you until now." All signs of a film about gender war wherein a man feels he ought to take charge of his wife and put her 'in line' with his thoughts. She is a case of repressed feminine anger which bursts out uncontrollably in the form of unbridled violent sexuality, which finally leads to the denouement- the mutilation of sexual parts by Her. (This is where I closed my eyes and hid behind my big box of popcorns).

Trier, who is said to have been depressed during the making of this film, shows cinematic brilliance only in bits and parts. The beginning is beautiful in black and white, almost dreamy. The rest of it is raw. Perhaps that is what Trier wanted to show - the raw cruelty of nature- from his point of view. The only point when the woods turn interesting in the cinematic way is when She, who has been wanting violent sex, rushes out in the middle of the night to masturbate. She is later joined by Him and as they have sexual intercourse in the dark night the camera zooms out to show a lot of white, slender female bodies under the twisted roots of the tree. (As in the poster) As woman, I read this scene as the subjugation of women by the dark forces of nature. Apart from this there are just a lot of scenes of injured animals, a deer on the run while giving birth, a dead baby bird being eaten by an eagle. (uggghhh... my eyes were closed). As for the story, it was reminiscent of Smilla's Sense of Snow.

What I like is the portrayal of feminine emotions. Especially that of a woman in grief- who slips into depression and is unable to take control of herself. Adding to this is the frustration she feels about the way He wants to take charge of her emotions and heal her, when perhaps she has moved on to a different level. Charlotte Gainsbourg has done a great job of portraying this character. But I didn't like was the stoic man (Dafoe). After all, He too is a father and He too must be depressed after the death of his child. Being a therapist doesn't mean that he wouldn't be sad. Instead, he acts like a Man who has to charge of everything but himself.

Trier isn't perfect, but the idea that he wanted to portray is. It is not everyday that a male filmaker takes a plunge into depths of dark feminine emotions.

News from Africa

Witchunt in Gambia

STOP PRESS

Just as news of the death of the LTTE leader Prabhakaran trickles in, I thought I should share some scenes of support for the Tamil Tigers that I witnessed during my travels in Scandinavia. There are a number of Sri Lankan Tamils in Denmark, Sweden, Finland and Norway. The democratic culture of these countries allows such groups to peacefully protest. Norway is a mediator in the conflict between Sinhalas and the Tamil Tigers.

Supporters of LTTE protesting in Stockholm

.....and in Oslo before the Norwegian Parliament

How I ditched Clint Eastwood

The macho profile of Clint Eastwood had given me the feeling that I am going to like Gran Torino. Its trailer during another movie was just as enticing. I thought he is going to be my reel-life father figure for a while. Sunday evening, I found myself waiting in queque at Biocity, an Aarhus multiplex. Once inside I found myself waiting for the film to start. But once it started all I wanted to do was run away. For Eastwood's character was so boorish, negative, like a man who has been hurt all his life, shards of glass planted in his soul.....in short he was a put off. I hated him from the opening scene. The way he watched his impudent grandchildren during his wive's funeral. What kind of a man would watch his spoilt grandchildren on his wive's funeral and what kind of a man would spit on the ground when his young granddaughter makes a request for piece of furniture for her room? And what kind of a man would tell a young priest that he was a '27-year-old over educated virgin, who held old women's hands and promised them of eternity?' Surely a very insensitive one- one who has overblown imagination of his masculinity.

I watched till the young priest meets the character of Eastwood in the bar to talk about confession. What kind of a priest would do that?? I walked out of the theatre - for I couldn't bear it anymore one man's boorish resistance to another's untimely attempt at redemption. I later realized the story was about his Chinese neighbours stealing his car- Gran Torino. Considering US anxiety about Chinese goods entering their markets - Gran Torino comes at an interesting time when US is going through a crisis and can (atleast cinematically) put the blame on the Chinese for all their troubles.

Meanwhile, Kate Winslet has caught my imagination. First with The Revolutionary Road and next with The Reader- the young protagonist of Titanic is shaped up into a fine actress- literally.

Hope she continues with her sensitive and soul stirring performances.

A question

What is the difference between information and knowledge?

The writing on the Deewar (the Wall)

Vijay: Mere pas gadi hai, bangla hai, paisa hai, tumhare pas kya hai?

(I have a car, a house, money, what do you have?)

Ravi: Mere pas ma hai
(I have mother)

This famous dialogue from the 1975 Amitabh Bachchan starrer, Deewar (The wall) is what came to my mind when I recently read about Amartya Sen's Capabilities Approach to development in his book Development as Freedom.
In this very famous scene from Deewar while elder brother Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) has turned to the world of crime to make up for the hardship and poverty that he faced as a child younger brother Ravi (Shashi Kapoor) has followed the course of hardwork to become a police inspector. Ultimately, there come a point when the mother (Nirupa Roy) has to decide which of her sons she would like to live with. While Vijay gives a material reason for his mother to stay with him. Ravi gives a more emotional reason. When he says ' mere paas ma hai' (i have mother), Ravi implies that mother is valuable than money, car and house and she needs to be safe and looked after for her sake. In her old age she needs a place far away from crime and harassment i.e. mental peace.

Amartya Sen 's human capabilities approach emphasises on similar values. According to him income is a very limited way of assessing development. For him development is the freedoms or the capabilities that a human being has to better his life. It includes the freedom to participate in political life, access to education and health facilities, freedom from rigid bureaucracies or authoritarian regimes that constrain individuality, freedom of women, etc. For Sen, an individual should be capable enough to secure himself a happy life. However, in most societies of the world one sees a different kind of poverty, unrelated to income levels. In America, it could be inaccessible health care insurance for those suffering with life threatening diseases, in Saudi Arabia it could be the restrictions on the freedoms of women, in China it could be the curtailing of expression.

Development as Freedom, was published in 1999 and I think it is a great way to define development, considering that we all live in a consumeristic society where 'money talks'. We all have at some point or the other been pressurized to make career decisions simply because of the money involved. But if someone would rather be a painter than an engineer then there shouldn't be anything stopping him/her from being that. In fact a rich engineer who is frustrated with his job, abuses his wife and children can be considered poor. He is not only poor but with he is also a hindrance to development of the society due to his half-hearted efforts at work.

In fact, this whole idea of poverty as someone without money seems like a myth. If a poor man is happy being a cobbler, earning a substantial amount of income, sending his children to school and treating his wife well then he is developed and rich enough.