Naveen's space

This one is a great movie with superb actors especially the children. I particularly liked the youngest actor who played the role of Jamal, and the scene where he jumps in the shithole to get an autograph of Amitabh Bachchan. The movie reminded me of Salaam Bombay, some of the scenes were superbly shot and are not too common in Hindi movies.

To me the movie was perfect but for one thing and that was the grey shade of Anil Kapoor as a host. Why was his character portrayed to be so hostile towards the chaiwala on stage? It didn’t matter what he did back stage, like misguiding Jamal in the bathroom about a question or handing him over to the police etc.

In reality no host would be allowed to ridicule a participant on the basis of his financial status. There have been actual instances where people like an auto rickshaw driver or coolie have come on shows like KBC, hosted b y Amitabh, Shah Rukh, or Salman. I believe the movie could have been made with Anil Kapoor acting with dignity on stage even though back stage he did not like the idea of a Slumdog getting the jackpot.

Maybe the director didn’t want to deviate from the book from which the movie was made. But two wrongs don’t make a right. Could Anil Kapoor have corrected the director and not blindly sign up for the film no matter how badly he wanted to be in the project.

According to me Anil should have been shown as an unbiased person while hosting the show and a jealous discriminating asshole back stage. That would have made more sense.

Imagine Amitabh Bachchan doing a role like this, it’s also true that he would be the last one to do so.

Rahman’s music like always is awesome. He probably is one of the all time greatest musicians the world has ever seen, forget just India. What I like about him is his ability to produce fusion music consistently over the years. When he fuses Indian classical music with reggae/western classical/rock/hip hip etc, he produces some amazing songs which are incomprehensible.

One of the best written articles on Sachin Tendulkar ........by Suresh Menon......read on!

In November 1989, a London-based writer came to the Indian team's nets in Karachi to seek out a player he was told had the "best on-drive in the game". That player, Sachin Tendulkar, was 16 and yet to play a Test, but he already had his future mapped out - by others as much as by himself. Anything less than the most centuries and the highest aggregate in international cricket would count as failure.

Nearly two decades later, when the inevitable has come to pass, fans may be merely satisfied rather than overcome, and even quite blasé about it. If it was ordained, where is the surprise? Such is the tyranny of inevitability. It throws a veil over the hard work, the physical toll, the mental strain that have gone into the making of a record-breaker. Of the 19 batsmen who have scored more than 8000 runs, only five have held the highest aggregate record, only three have played 150 Tests, but only one, Tendulkar, has been two different batsmen.

Tendulkar made his debut in Pakistan. Of his team-mates then, one has become an insufferable television commentator, and two others have become good ones; one was convicted of murder and sent to jail, another banned for life for match-fixing. One eliminated the line between whistle-blower and perpetrator, one ran a banned series of matches, another was chairman of selectors. One has dropped out of the public eye and another has turned television actor. But Tendulkar bats on. Longevity is intrinsic to greatness.

At 19, the Mumbai boy was already the world's best batsman. Interestingly, Tendulkar seemed to agree with this assessment in a quiet, matter-of-fact way. This lack of arrogance possibly caused him to be less destructive in Test cricket than he might have been, but it was a crucial element in his becoming a national icon. Indians don't like their sporting heroes to be conceited; they give their hearts to modest players who underplay their emotions while performing consistently.

Of the two Tendulkars who played for India, the first had three or four shots for every ball; the second seemed conscious of three or four ways it could have got him out. Yet, amazingly, the spirit of the boy is ever present in the batsman, whether 16 or 35. A decade after making his debut, he was still teaching Shoaib Akhtar at the World Cup the difference between a good batsman and a great one. When pushed to the wall, Tendulkar continues to exhibit a rare creativity. It is not enough to somehow escape, it is necessary to escape while teaching the bowler a lesson he will never forget.

In sport as in art, late works usually crown a lifetime of effort. Looked at from either end of their careers, sportsmen present a harmonious picture. Occasionally, the "late style" (to borrow a phrase made popular by Edward Said) is about intransigence and unresolved contradictions. It doesn't fit into the whole.

Of the batsmen who have made over 9000 Test runs, six found their idiom at the start of their careers and kept with it (including, so far, the three still active). The later Brian Lara was not much different from the early Lara, the Allan Border who made his first run was the same as the one who made the 11,000th. The two exceptions are the Indians, Sunil Gavaskar and Tendulkar.

It is not uncommon for batsmen who began their careers as leading stroke-makers to finish as part of the supporting cast. Age converts the carefree into the careworn. Rohan Kanhai is a good example of a batsman who began by inventing strokes against the best bowling and ended by playing "experienced" innings in the shadow of the next generation.

Experience often means that players are more aware of things in their own game that do not work, and are chary of taking chances. Why attempt a risky boundary when there is a safe single to be had? Firebrand speakers become merely adequate, daredevil adventurers become boring teachers, those renowned for thinking out of the box show how comfortable they are sitting in it. It is the same with sportsmen.

"Late style is what happens," wrote Edward Said in his study of musicians and writers, "if art does not abdicate its rights in favour of reality." Great players go against the grain as well as place themselves at the head of a trend.

Gavaskar who began his career as a generic name for batting technique, discovered late the joys of hooking fast bowlers; a ferocious attack on Malcolm Marshall and Michael Holding featured in his 29th Test century. It took him just 94 deliveries, and was one of the fastest in the game's history. This from a batsman who once took 60 overs to make 36 not out in a World Cup match.

Tendulkar's journey, though in the reverse direction, is no less dramatic. If Gavaskar found his responses within the tenets of orthodoxy, Tendulkar, no less orthodox for being a more attacking player, extended the reach of such orthodoxy. Five years ago he began to play a shot to the left of third man, which began with him withdrawing from the line of the ball delivered by a fast bowler and glancing it fine - but on the off side. It called for remarkable control and steely wrists. It wasn't as ugly as the reverse sweep, but lacked the grace of the "straight-bat pull", where he (and later, Virender Sehwag) whipped the ball, tennis-style cross court. Both strokes were created for the one-day game, but are no less effective when played wearing whites.

It may have been the Chennai defeat against Pakistan a decade ago that first sowed the seeds of the new Tendulkar. He was distraught at getting out so close to a win. He saw the need to be around; occupancy of the crease was not just a personal quirk but a team requirement. Tendulkar, the champagne cricketer with a dancer's footwork, curbed himself. He didn't actually become a clock-watching clerk, but he understood the need.

I think India has to address certain customs and practices like the dowry and caste system. These practices are not just prevalent in the villages but also in the metros, there are very few communities in India that don't give or take dowry though the Supreme Court has banned it.

When you say that it’s okay for a person in India to take a loan for his daughter’s marriage because it is his responsibility, i think more often than not the loan is for the dowry.

In the Hindi movie Swades, there is a scene where the farmer has taken a loan and is unable to repay because of drought and the landlords do not provide him access to water from their wells or pumps. When he wants to do something other than farming to repay the loan he is not allowed because he is from a particular caste. I am sure in real life a lot worse happens.

I also think that because of the caste system people now want to be known and belong to the backward section just so that they can avail reservation. The present form of reservation is like denying a cricketer the equipment and grounds for practice but reserving a place for him in the national team. The best solution would be to admit people in schools and colleges across the country without them mentioning their caste and providing financial aid for people in need. It sounds crazy but it is not as crazy as the Supreme Court banning the caste system like it did to Sati and Untouchability.

Population is also a big hurdle for India; we have to implement some sort of control measures like China. I also think that maybe it’s too late, and looks impossible with different religions/customs/28 states, each state like a small country with its own language.

Politicians and people from IAS and IPS are always blamed for the problems in the country, for me it doesn’t make sense because they are a very small part of our huge population which thinks that its better to blame the politicians and civil servants than be a part of the system and make a difference.