I think, therefore I am

I attended this lecture in the British Library where some motivational speaker talked about discovering the self. He asked, what made us individual entities? What is the self? A few hands went up, venturing some answers and the speaker promptly showed how nothing can really define the "self" as an individual entity. Not even our thoughts because every thought that comes to our mind, has already been thought of by somebody else... Obviously, I thought of the cartesian philosophy of "Cogito ergo sum" or I think, therefore I am. My self distinguishes itself from the others by its thoughts. Had Descartes got it wrong... I think yes, more so since I read the following paragraph from Milan Kundera's L'Immortalite:
Je pense, donc je suis est un propos d’intellectuel qui sous-estime les maux de dents. Je sens, donc je suis est une vérité de portée beaucoup plus générale et qui concerne tout être vivant. Mon moi ne se distingue pas essentiellement du vôtre par la pensée. Beaucoup de gens, peu d’idées : nous pensons tous à peu près la même chose en transmettant, en empruntant, en volant nos idées l’un à l’autre. Mais si quelqu’un me marche sur le pied, c’est moi seul qui sens la douleur. Le fondement du moi n’est pas la pensée mais la souffrance, sentiment le plus élémentaire de tous. Dans la souffrance, même un chat ne peut douter de son moi unique et non interchangeable.
Translation:
I think, therefore I am is a statement of the intellectual who underestimates toothache. I feel, therefore I am is a more general truth and concerns all living beings. My “I” does not necessarily distinguish itself from yours by the thought. Too many people, too few thoughts: we think more or less the same thing by transmitting, borrowing, stealing each other’s thoughts. But if somebody steps on my feet, only I will feel the pain. The “I” is based not on the thought but on suffering, the most elementary emotion of all. Even a cat who is suffering cannot doubt her unique and non interchangeable “I”.

True, isn't it?

In one go...

I’ve been reading a lot lately but couldn’t gather up enough motivation to write about it. I am too lazy I guess, but enough of soul searching and self-introspection; let me give you a not-so-brief update.

But first, a few words about “iRead”, a great application available both on Orkut and Facebook, which allows you to keep track of your reading. You can also classify the books into those you’ve read, want to read, are reading presently or don’t want to read. You can also ‘chuck’ books at your friends. For example, you could ‘chuck’ “P.S. I love you” to your loved one or “The Three Musketeers” to a friend expecting
triplets or “The Godfather” at your neighbourhood bhai. And my examples only get worse…

Anyway, coming back to books, let me begin by telling you about my brand new purchases. I bought “The Great Gatsby” and “The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde” from Crosswords at surprisingly cheap rates. “The Great Gatsby” an American classic, is the tragic love story of the mysterious Jay Gatsby seen through the eyes of Nick Carraway, his neighbour and friend. It is set against the backdrop of the glitzy and glamorous but superficial and immoral world of the rich Americans in the twenties. Daisy, Carraway’s cousin is married to the wealthy Tom Buchanan. Her comfortable and boring life is thrown into a tumult when she comes across Gatsby – a man she had loved in her youth. Formerly a poor soldier he is now an immensely rich dandy famous for his extravagant parties and wants her to come back to him. Her dilemma unleashes a series of events – crimes, deaths and the eventual ruination of Gatsby. I won’t give away the story, but let me quote the last few lines of the novel which I find extremely beautiful and true:

Gatsby believed in (…) the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter – tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther… And one fine morning –
So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

Such is the beauty of the text; “The Great Gatsby” is a novel that deserves to be read and re-read. I saw its movie adaptation on the History Channel yesterday. It was quite well-made.

My other prize catch “The Complete Works of Oscar Wilde” is obviously a treat for, the wittiest and the cleverest quotes are often (correctly or falsely) attributed to this talented author. I had read the “Picture of Dorian Gray” previously and found it to be morbidly interesting. Now “morbidly interesting” is my way of saying that I found it slightly repulsive and dark but it interested me nevertheless. Out of this book, I’ve so far read two of his well-know plays: “Salome” and “The Importance of being Earnest”. While the former is “interestingly morbid” too the latter is a light comic piece interspersed with the usual Wilde witticisms and paradoxes. Though I haven’t read much of his poetry yet I find it typically Parnassian/Romantic what with its exotic and beautiful imagery, the use of mythological characters and the recurring themes of beauty, death, decay and love. Must say, makes me think of Baudelaire. But the best works of Wilde are undoubtedly his short stories. The collection “Lord Arthur Savile’s Crime and other stories” is quite amusing. “A House of Pomegranates” and “The Happy Prince and Other Tales” contain such pearls as “The Selfish Giant” and “The Birthday of Infanta”. The stories are deeply touching and all carry an underlying message of selfless love. What a genius!

I also read “The Stranger” and “The Fall” by Albert Camus, the great absurdist author. While I enjoyed the former quite a bit (though I must admit that the absurd is not my thing or at least I don’t understand it well) the latter was so heavy that I gave it up half way through. I intend to write about “The Stranger” in detail later since we discussed about it a lot in my French literature class.

Then I jumped on to absurdist theatre: Samuel Beckett’s “Waiting for Godot” seemed like a good way to begin. Again, I might be too dumb to understand it, but I didn’t care for it much. The dialogues are nonsensical and the storyline is absurd (I know it is supposed to be, but still). For those who have read it, please do tell me what or who you think Godot is. For me Godot is “happiness” or even “tomorrow” since the future always seems to be full of hope and happiness. Cf. the last lines of Gatsby.
After “absurd”, I went in for some “existentialism’ and read Jean Paul Satre’s “Le Mur” (The Wall). It is a collection of some hard-hitting and thought-provoking short stories where individuals seek to escape existence but are contained by the “wall”. I especially loved “Le Mur”, “La Chambre” (The Room) and “L’enfance d’un chef” (The Childhood of the Boss). “L’enfance…” portrays the existentialist dilemma of a boy throughout his childhood and early youth and I could identify with some parts. The stories are provocative; they contain reference to sexuality (remember the book was published decades ago) and even homosexuality. Ought to be read by anybody’s who’s interested in the existentialist philosophy. It is such a pity though that Sartre didn’t write any more short stories.

Lastly, let me tell you about Anita Desai’s “The Journey to Ithaca”. It is the story of Matteo, a young hippie who comes to India to find spirituality and his wife Sophie. While Matteo is spiritual and idealistic, Sophie is materialistic and practical. She sets out on a journey to uncover the not-so-holy past of the Mother, a spiritual leader of whom Matteo is a loyal disciple. I was expecting to read about Sri Aurobindo Ashram’s Mother but it seems Desai has only drawn certain incidents from her life. The Mother is largely fictional, which left me very disappointed. In any case I’m not a big fan of hers: I had read her “The Village by the Sea” or some such novel which was quite boring. Ithaca is slightly better but Desai’s “wordsmanship” is nothing to write home about.

Currently, I have started with Milan Kundera’s “Immortality” in French which is, so far, “unputdownable”. Must get back to it… Ciao!

Valu

With Atul Kulkarni and an entire village
A delightful little film about a village terrorised by a bull. Great cast, a wonderful script, situations one can identify with, humourous dialogues (I'm running out of adjectives): in short, a perfect example of how a film should be.
Also a reason to be optimist about the future of Marathi fil industry...

Jodhaa Akbar

Directed by: Ashutosh Gowariker
With Hrithik Roshan, Aishwarya Rai

This film is a history lesson gone all wrong. And I’m not even talking about the controversy on Jodhaa bai. Let me explain: Akbar and Jodhaa are allowed to meet each other all alone even before they get married. (Remember, we are in the 16th century.) They get married without Jodhaa having to change her religion. (I mean, I’m no expert on history but this sounds highly improbable). I won’t go into the details. Suffice to say that there were a few unexpected sniggers in the cinema hall which show that you can’t take the audience for a ride under the name of cinematic license.
But there are a few strongholds too, namely, the costumes and the action scenes. And last but not the least, kudos to Hrithik for carrying the entire film on his muscular shoulders. He looks yummy, acts well and romances Aishwarya with such charm that you want to fall in love with him. Aishwarya, as usual, is not bad but her character does not arouse any sympathy or affection.
To be seen strictly on the big screen…

Ronin

With Robert De Niro, Jean Reno, Natacha McElhone, etc.

Ronin are Samurais who have lost their masters. Disgraced, they wander around working as mercenaries and seeking revenge for their fallen lord. The Ronin here are assorted ex-military men (mostly) who are rounded up by the mysterious Deidre (McElhone) to help her acquire a suitcase the contents of which remain unknown till the end. And so we have Sam (De Niro), Vincent (Reno) and the others chasing this suitcase amidst lots of action, amazing car chases and some memorable one-liners.
Though an entertaining film there are certain drawbacks that left me confused and frustrated. Firstly, everybody speaks heavily accented English and the storyline gets pretty complicated at times. But this film is worth a watch anyway, thanks to the cast and the dialogue.

Om Shanti Om

Directed by: Farah Khan

With Shahrukh Khan, Deepika Padukone, Shreyas Talpade
Absolutely senseless but good enough to watch only because this film doesn’t take itself seriously. The spoofs on the ways of Bollywood, Filmfare awards and southie cowboy films are just too funny. Needless to say, Shahrukh plays himself and he does that exceedingly well, we all know that. Deepika is good enough, this being her first film.

Madame Bovary

De Gustave Flaubert

« Madame Bovary » est un œuvre d’avant-garde. C’est le récit de vie d’une adultère et pourtant on sympathise avec ce personnage. Voici l’histoire en bref :
Eduquée dans un couvent, Emma vit avec son père sur une ferme. Elle se marie avec Charles Bovary, un médecin. Très vite, elle commence à s’ennuyer : la vie à la campagne ne lui plait pas, et sa relation avec Charles n’a rien à voir avec tout ce dont elle avait rêvé en lisant des romans. Elle devient dépressive. La monotonie de la vie maritale et l’ennuie l’emmènent vers l’adultère et enfin vers sa décadence. Ruinée à cause des dettes énormes et abandonnée par ses deux amants Rodolphe et Léon, elle se suicide.

Emma Bovary est un personnage très complexe. On peut sympathiser avec elle parce qu’elle est victime de sa goût pour la vie. Malgré sa dépression et son suicide éventuel, je crois qu’elle aime bien vivre. Elle veut vivre avec une ferveur et aimer avec l’intensité mais comme elle n’y parvient pas (ni avec Charles ni avec Léon) elle est détruite.

Madame Bovary est donc un personnage bien réel, loin des héroïnes «vertueuses ». C’est pour cela que je disais que c’est un œuvre d’avant-garde.

Malgré sa lenteur j’ai beaucoup aimé le livre.

(Don't know why but I couldn't have written it in English)