|
|
|
|
|
A discriminatory ban Censuring the censor |
|
|
Abolish Padma awards
mind
your language
CINEMA: NEW Releases
A dependable team Less dance, more melodrama
|
A discriminatory ban Basketball
became the latest game to discriminate against Sikh players when officials at the FIBA Asia Cup tournament held at Wuhan, China, told two players — Amrit Pal Singh and Amjyot Singh — that they could not play while wearing their turbans. The rule quoted by the officials was Article 4.4.2 of the Switzerland-based International Basketball Federation (FIBA), which states: “Players shall not wear equipment (objects) that may cause injury to other players.” It may be noted that the players were wearing under-turbans — small, compact cloth coverings that keep their hair covered. Sikh players wearing under-turbans or smaller handkerchiefs to neatly tuck in their long hair are regularly seen at all international events, including the Olympics, and have been so for a long, long time. They have done so in the past, even at FIBA events like the Asia Championship in Manila. Sikh players have faced problems earlier too, and while they seem to have been solved at that particular point, they have resurfaced now. The Basketball Federation of India has strongly condemned “the unwarranted action of the Technical Commission of FIBA Asia”. It has asked the organisation “to stop discrimination against the Sikh athletes representing Indian basketball teams at the international level immediately.” The FIBA officials’ decision was wrong. Sikhs have a right to play without being discriminated against for wearing their articles of faith. The FIBA ban evoked widespread condemnation. Some US political leaders termed the policy “discriminatory” and have launched a campaign against it. Turban-wearing Sikh players have played for US basketball teams, even at the level of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), which regulates athletic events. In India, the issue has been widely reported, and there are some indications that the FIBA board may reconsider its decision when it meets later. Sikhs play volleyball, football, hockey, handball, cricket and other team games at the international level without any such requirements. There is no doubt that the FIBA’s action against the Sikh players discriminates against players. It shows that the organisation is not in sync with the times, and insensitive to the religious requirements of the players.
|
|
Censuring the censor The
censor board has often been in the eye of a storm. Yet by and large it has been censured either for banning certain films or for imposing cuts which producers find unpalatable. But this time it has come under the scanner for most unsavoury of all reasons. It is indeed abominable that the CEO of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), Rakesh Kumar, has been arrested by the CBI for allegedly accepting bribes for providing speedy clearance certificates to movies. That the highest official after the chairperson of the CBFC has been caught in a “cash-for-clearance” scam, once again, underlines the urgency for a relook at the CBFC. The CBFC is a statutory body under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting and regulates the public exhibition of films under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952. Films can be publicly exhibited in India only after they are certified by the CBFC. Strangely, while the film industry and the board have been at daggers drawn for a host of reasons, money changing hands has only been alluded to. Now some agents and an advisory panel member too are believed to be involved in the bribery scandal. That there is actually a ‘pricelist’ for clearing films points at the rot running deep that can't be stemmed by just suspending the CEO. The fact that he allegedly demanded money for a Chhattisgarhi film is even more contemptible for regional cinema needs constant encouragement and patronage to survive. The current imbroglio cements the lobby who argues that the board has outlived its utility. Questioning the usefulness of the board, however, might be an extreme viewpoint. But the need to update the Cinematograph Act 1952, which determines the certification process, has been felt for some time. Hence, the Mudgal panel was set up. While batting for creative and artistic freedom, the panel recommended that the members of the advisory panels of the CBFC should be more professional and have adequate knowledge of cinema. All very well, only professional integrity must precede all other qualities. The future of the multi-billion Indian film industry can't be held hostage to the greed of few corrupt officials.
|
||
|
Thought for the Day
Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes. —
Carl Jung
|
||
War and commerce It used to be said that wars in future would not be waged for political reasons, but for commercial supremacy. It was generally believed that commercial jealousy and rivalry alone would tend to produce wars. But the present European war seems to show that the causes are purely political, and if the commercial and industrial population of the various countries involved had the prevailing voice in their respective countries, the war would have been impossible. For the first blow has been dealt on these very people as a result of the war and both capital and revenue will have to be spent enormously. The whole industrial machinery of Europe has been brought to a standstill and international trade is practically stopped.
Control of foreigners in British India An Ordinance of a very drastic kind has just been promulgated by the Government of India for the exercise of more effective control over foreigners in British India. The American Consul at Madras lately issued a warning to all American citizens in his consular district to be strictly neutral in their attitude. That and similar warnings are now rendered superfluous by the all embracing provisions of the new Ordinance Under section 3 of the Governor-General may by order prohibit or regulate and restrict in such manner as he thinks fit the entry of foreigners into British India and their departure from British India and regulate and restrict in such manner as he thinks fit the liberty of foreigners residing or being in India. Foreigners are to enter into and depart from British India by prescribed routes and by prescribed ports.
|
Abolish Padma awards Such awards had their critics right from the beginning. That is why many individuals, including Gandhians, eminent journalists, historians and human rights activists, have politely declined to accept the awards as recently as 2007. That is why the assumptions and actuality in giving these awards needs to be debated in a brutally open manner. Bharat Ratna was given to the first Governor General of India C. Raja Gopalachari (1954), S. Radhakrishnan, Pt. Nehru (1955), and Pt. G.B. Pant (1957). It is unfortunate that Pt. Nehru, who was the tallest leader, set a bad precedent as he had to be persuaded to accept Bharat Ratna. He was the Prime Minister. He did not require the award to enhance his stature. In fact, there is credible information that Maulana Azad declined to accept it in 1955 and advised Nehru to do so accordingly. But once Nehru accepted it, politicisation and partisanship of the award became inevitable. So we have a curious example of Maulana Azad (though he was against this institution) being given the award posthumously in 1992; Sardar patel in 1991, while Pt. G.B. Pant had already been given in 1957. Is that not perverting seniority and history? The only way out is to abolish the institution of awards. But then I suppose politicians suffer from vanity and enjoy giving awards in all spheres; curiously even in sports, when in reality they may not even know what is off-break bowling in cricket or offside in hockey. That is why hockey in which we had wizards like Dhyan Chand, the winner of Olympics who has not been given Bharat Ratna, because the present-day small politicians find more money in IPL Cricket. It is the money angle that determines the supremacy of a game. Is that not the reason why kabaddi, our home-grown game so popular in the North, especially Punjab, has been sidelined? It was rather scoffed at by the Anglicised Indians when Dr. Lohia, the socialist leader, wanted it to be treated as a national game. Now of course it is one of most upcoming events (all because of T.V. IPL presentation and the consequent money making in the bargain). The award of Bharat Ratna raises serious question of propriety, and exposes the conceit and impudence of small-time politicians to arrogate to themselves the right to recognise the contribution of our national heroes of the past. I firmly believe that any attempt by the pygmies of our generation to pick our heroes and freedom fighters of pre-1947 like Netaji Subas Chandra Bose and Bhagat Singh is shamefully presumptuous. Who do these small politicians think they are — puny individuals strutting in false feathers by purporting to confer the honour on our heroes, when we should instead be bowing our heads to their sacrifices in the fight for freedom. Let their life be an inspiration to all of us. Let me share with you the courage and bravery of Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev and Rajguru. In 1930 after they had been sentenced to death, efforts were made by some well-wishers to persuade him to sign the application to be sent to the government for the commutation of his sentence to life imprisonment. My father was also in Central Jail, Lahore, where he had been detained as a Satyagrahi. In the evening prisoners were allowed to come out of the cell for some time to walk and exercise in the lawn outside. My father and Bhagat Singh used to have a walk at the same place. After his death sentence, my father told Bhagat Singh: “Many people are requesting you to sign the petition. Don’t you think that if your life is spared, the movement would get a big push?” On this the young man of 23 years said unflinchingly: “No, Sachar Sahab, I feel my sacrifice will bring higher results”. Such was the courage of the young man. We all know the wave of revolutionary ferment which swept the country after his execution. Of course, I was a young kid, but I still remember the electrifying current in the country. And lest anyone should forget — the Congress which was till that time content with asking for Dominion Status, was forced into demanding complete Independence as was insisted by Bhagat Singh when it held its annual conference on the banks of the Ravi at Lahore on January 26, 1930 (Bhagat Singh’s was hanged on March 23, 1930). One of the suggestions given by an eminent columnist is to give Bharat Ratna to Field Marshall Manekshaw. If awards are to be continued, it is an apt name. But then the journalist in his enthusiasm has made the unfortunate comment that Manekshaw's contribution was greater and more memorable than that of awardee Aruna Asaf Ali……”. I feel that in his enthusiasm the journalist friend has hit his own toe. Probably, he was too young in 1942, when the Quit India movement called by Gandhiji was at its peak. All the Congressmen even at the village level were put in jail. The Quit India movement was led by Socialist leaders, including Jaya Prakash Narayan, Dr. Lohia and Aruna Asaf Ali. In 1942 Aruna Asaf Ali was the face of the underground movement. She bravely travelled throughout the country and inspired youth. Any attempt to underestimate her contribution is unforgivable. But then modern newspapers have a different priority. None of the main newspapers even carried a small report about the importance of 9th August, the Quit India movement day. In this background the only respectable and dignified course left is to abolish the awards — in a democracy the affection and recognition by the masses is the best tribute to stalwarts in various fields of life.
|
|||
On conventions of using infinitives — Bernadette Mayer The
poem runs into several lines, almost every line beginning with an infinitive. The most famous quote with the infinitive, however, is the one by Shakespeare: “To be, or not to be, that is the question.” Evidently, the infinitive is a favourite with writers. The basic form of a verb, it is often preceded by “to”. Some examples of its use follow: 1. Afzal moved a little but refused
to leave. In the sentence above, “to leave” illustrates the use of the “to infinitive”. The sentence has three action verbs, “move, refuse” and “leave”. Since “move” and “refuse” are the main verbs of the two clauses “He moved ...” and “(he) refused ...”, they get to carry the tense. On the other hand, “leave”, an infinitive, is not permitted to show the tense, true of
all infinitives. 2. Pritinder made the students call their parents. As illustrated by “call” here, infinitives in some situations occur without “to” appearing before them and are referred to as bare infinitives. Therefore in the sentence above, it will be wrong on the part of the user to say “Pritinder made the students to call their parents” because “make” can take the infinitive without “to”. When the structure “object + infinitive” follows the main verbs such as, “make, see, hear, feel, watch” or “notice”, the infinitive occurs without “to”. In certain other structures too, infinitives are not preceded by “to”, as in “we can leave” — the infinitive “leave” placed after an auxiliary modal. 3. These are the voyages of the Starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission ... to boldly go where no man has
gone before. The famous TV catchphrase “to boldly go ... before” from Star Trek also carries a popular illustration of split-infinitives: “to boldly go”. Splitting an infinitive with an adverb until recently was looked at as bad English style. The recommended form in this case would have been placing the adverb “boldly” after the infinitive “to go”. The split infinitive has gained acceptance with many users preferring expressions like “to quickly answer” or “to suddenly disappear” in order to place the modifying adverb very close to the infinitive. 4. Aman took Renu to watch the play. She didn't want to. With the presence of “to”, the user has been able to avoid the repetition of the infinitive and other words which may have followed “to” (... watch the play with him). In some cases of ellipsis, we can actually drop the entire infinitive: “He shouldn’t go mountaineering; he doesn’t have the courage (to go).” Infinitives are used in a variety of word environments and their uses have been well described in books of grammar. Increasing awareness of the conventions of using infinitives brings us closer to Standard English.
|
|||
CINEMA: NEW Releases Dabang, fearless male police officers Hindi cinema has seen many. But in a country where women in uniform are as much a reality as the fact that often they too are at the receiving end of injustice, depiction of a brave woman police officer on the celluloid screen is still a rarity.
So on this count alone, Rani Mukerji-centric Mardaani deserves a round of applause. That it deals with a burning issue of child trafficking makes the endeavour even more praiseworthy. But hey, this isn’t a hard-hitting account of flesh trade in which millions of young girls are caught systematically and ruthlessly. Nor for that matter is it a dreary, dull accounting of data and figures and recounting of hair-raising tales in the documentary fashion. In fact, meeting this expletive- mouthing tough-as-nails Shivani Shivaji Roy, with Rani Mukerji nailing her part with aplomb, is a sheer delight. Both when she relates to her family as a caring person and when she goes around bashing up goons wherever she finds them breaking the law. Soon enough she is pitted against the mafia (for very personal reasons of course) that not only controls drug trade but also prostitution. The cat and mouse game that begins hereafter is undeniably engaging and thrilling. Actually, the best part of the movie is the interface (call it dialogue baazi if you wish) between Shivani and the arch villain Walt aka Karan (Tahir Bhasin). He by the way is a young 27-year-old actor whose character relishes the game of one-upmanship as much as his evil ways. Their sparring, both verbal and physical, packs quite a punch. Mercifully, at least to begin with, in the revenge game the film doesn’t follow the predictable path. Hence, there is no kidnapping of Shivani’s immediate family members or direct threat to her life, initially that is. In depicting the underside of the flesh trade too, the director has shown remarkable restraint and makes his point minus the gory or stomach-churning details. But pray why does the film that steer clear of melodrama for most part go the same overdramatic path in the end is baffling? Surely the climax and the anticlimax could have been as controlled as the rest of the film. Nevertheless, Mardaani is a decent watch. Most importantly for Rani is in superlative form. As the daredevil inspector there is not an iota of overacting. Be it when she confronts the bad guys or when she walks away in the end with a jacket on her shoulders most triumphantly like a real winner. The film may not score ten on ten but Rani sure does and keeping her close company are cameos small and big. But the most noteworthy part is of her real bête noire Walt (Tahir Bhasin). With just the right degree of menace and equal amount of control, he brings his devilish part alive most emphatically and powerfully. On the final barometer, the film only leaves you shaken, not quite stirred. But there is no denying that both the movie industry and the country can do with more Mardaanis. Minus some of the jingoism of course. But even with it, this Mardaani fares far better than the hollow Dabanggs and Singhams. And this is no feminist speaking.
|
|||
|
A dependable team
Two
successful editions later, the Expendables franchise picks up steam and respectability in this third edition. In fact, the narrative is smart enough to structure the plot in such a manner that it makes it all look natural and progressive. There’s more of a plot this time — the exposition and set-up are developed enough to validate the entire schema of action envisaged thereof. The near loss of one member, Caesar (Terry Crews), from his team during the opening battle sequence against Conrad Stonebanks (Mel Gibson) — a former member of the Expendables, now rogue — forces team leader Barney Ross (Sylvester Stallone) into a guilt trip and we see him reconsidering team composition, opting for younger, fitter members with varied attributes. It’s probably a wink at the short-of-breath, age-heavy veterans powering this successful franchise in the last two editions and allows them a breather without mocking their ability to regale the fans.
|
|||
|
Less dance, more melodrama
Saahil
Prem, the actor who played beefcake to Sunny Leone’s sizzle in Ragini MMS 2, goes several steps further — into writing, directing and starring in a film about dance. The film has a decent-enough storyline, but the standard issue, plotting and tokenisms about family strife, make it a little less exciting. To top it all, the dance sequences are not choreographed or shot well enough for visual appeal. For a genre picture about dance, this one is in fact lacking quality. In fact, the narrative gets a little too embroiled in set-up and exposition to be able to do full justice to the dance form it was meant to showcase. The storyline takes us through struggles and anxieties of a small town and the Asian immigrant youth, telling the story in particular about a young man, Aarav (Saahil Prem), who chooses to go the dance way to further his career. His struggle to make it in the underground dance circuit forms the crux of the story. Right through the film, the dance moves shown are not as entertaining or smartly choreographed as they should have been. The dance on display is not exactly graceful, with the lead performer looking a little out of sorts in all his routines. It’s only when star performer Salah Benlemqwansa gets on the floor that the film ups the skill quotient and picks up interest. Unfortunately, that bit comes a little too late in the narrative to suffice. So, as far as dance genre films go, this one is far short of moves to make the grade.
|
|
Saturday August 23
Bobby Jasoos is a comedy-drama film directed by Samar Shaikh and produced by Dia Mirza and Sahil Sangha. The film stars Vidya Balan and features Ali Fazal, Supriya Pathak, Rajendra Gupta and Tanvi Azmi in supporting roles. ZEE STUDIO FILMY ZEE CLASSIC MOVIES OK ZEE CINEMA MOVIES NOW & PICTURES STAR GOLD HBO Sunday August 24 ZEE STUDIO FILMY ZEE CLASSIC MOVIES OK MOVIES NOW & PICTURES STAR GOLD HBO
|
||
|
| HOME PAGE | |
Punjab | Haryana | Jammu & Kashmir |
Himachal Pradesh | Regional Briefs |
Nation | Opinions | | Business | Sports | World | Letters | Chandigarh | Ludhiana | Delhi | | Calendar | Weather | Archive | Subscribe | Suggestion | E-mail | |
An
“to listen to more popular music
Like the Hollywood film Taken, it does bring the serious issue to the fore. Yet from start to finish it remains a thriller of sorts and hinges on the one-woman battle against the organised gang of child-traffickers. Nothing wrong with that. If one-man army of our superstar heroes can take on all the bad men, why can’t a woman? After all, the film is not titled Mardaani for nothing. Besides, she is no ordinary woman but a senior inspector of the crime branch of Mumbai police.
So, in come some breaths of fresh air, faster, fitter, young ones, who look better at jump-stunts and more convincing in the shoot-outs. The ‘smash-em to smithereens’ action of yore has now been replaced by some tech-savvy moves orchestrated well enough to proffer the requisite adrenaline rush. But, the mission doesn’t succeed even with that heavy dose of youthful testosterone. It forces Barney to reconsider his options; then, with the combined might of youthful aggression and ageing experience powering the final clash, it’s a sure bet on who wins the battle eventually. It’s a kill-happy display of might and the structuring of the action is exciting. This one has more heft than the previous two editions. So, go for it!
The narrative is a little confused with very little dance action and a little more into hackneyed drama about friendship, family dysfunctions and delayed understanding.
8:00PM movies ok
1:00PM zee studio