|
|
|
|
|
History is a teacher Rohit Sharma's amazing feat |
|
|
Merkel’s opportunity to lead Europe
Watching language change
CINEMA: NEW Releases
Thought-provoking human drama One-man army Miscalculation
|
History is a teacher Among
his greatest legacies was cultivating a pluralist view in Indian society. On Jawaharlal Nehru's 125th birth anniversary, however, the country is sharply divided over whether to blame him for all that is wrong today or hail him for everything from democracy to scientific temper and India's place of dignity in the comity of nations. The truth, of course, can be neither. He was human and a leader of the masses at the same time. Being the first Prime Minister who ruled for 17 years, he naturally had to be responsible for many momentous decisions, as much as for all the failures the country had during that long stint. Five decades since his death, it would have been a good time to look back with the detachment needed for an unimpassioned academic analysis of the happenings of his times that were as formative as tumultuous for the country. And it could have been especially a 'free environment' to debate Nehru and his legacy given that the Congress is out of power. The extreme bitterness in the polity today - a phenomenon the Nehru-Gandhi duo worked against - has, however, reduced the occasion to yet another mud-slinging opportunity between the Congress and the BJP. While Nehru's own party has decided to keep the BJP out of its celebrations, the government's plans to mark the occasion seem to give short shrift to a man who deserved better. If nothing else, there is much to learn from Nehru's successes as well as failures. The BJP government has associated 'leaders of the Congress' such as Gandhi and Sardar Patel with some of its programmes and campaigns, yet somehow the honour accorded seems to play more into building Brand Modi than recalling those personalities' significant and varied contributions. The Gandhi family's fear the same may be done to Nehru thus has some basis. The Congress on its part has to demonstrate the inclusiveness it wants the government to practise. Nehru has also been called an 'idealist'. If the Congress today wants to rebuild itself, idealism may not be a bad place to start.
|
|
Rohit Sharma's amazing feat Rohit
Sharma deserves the praise he's getting for scoring the highest One-Day International score, the 264 against Sri Lanka. Despite the flat track, despite the ordinary and demoralised Sri Lankan bowling attack, despite the dropped catches, this was a stunning knock. Sharma hit 33 fours and nine sixers for a total of 186 runs from boundaries alone - that's just three less than the great Viv Richards' highest ODI score of 189, which, incidentally, came off 170 balls. Sharma, who played 173 balls, could have won the 1983, 1987, 1992, 1996 and 1999 World Cup finals on his own. In the event, he beat Sri Lanka - who came to India after the tour was hastily arranged due to the pullout by the West Indies - by 13 runs. It's all right to celebrate, but there's something troubling about Sharma's knock - it again brings to the fore the growing imbalance between the bat and the ball in conditions designed to favour the batsmen. The comparison with Richards is pertinent because Richards is considered by his peers and experts, without exception, the most destructive batsman of the last 40 years, if not more. Sharma outdid Richards by such a massive margin. With due respect to Sharma, he's no Richards, yet the talented Indian batsman has made two double centuries in ODI cricket in 12 months. This puts him in the danger of being labelled a home-track bully - he averages 68.28 in India, but 26.16 in Australia, 12.28 in South Africa and 14.78 in Sri Lanka. Since 2010, four 200-plus individual scores have been made in ODI cricket, all by Indian batsmen, all in India. There are several reasons behind the modern run-deluge in ODIs - a major one is that the batsmen are willing to play more risky, aggressive and innovative shots. More significantly, the rules favour the batsmen because "the fans come to see the batsmen, not bowlers", as the argument goes. The modern bats have made it very easy for anyone to hit sixers - and even off mis-hits, the ball can easily sail over the boundary. Bowlers have little going for them in ODIs - field restrictions have made them merely instruments that facilitate the hitting of a six or a four. This just can't be good for the sport.
|
||
|
Thought for the Day
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather we should thank God that such men lived. — George S. Patton
|
||
The territorials in India FOR reasons best known to Government no opportunity was given to the people to publicly welcome the Territorials on their landing at Bombay. But Indians nevertheless appreciate the public spirit of the many thousands of British citizens who have temporarily resigned their respective occupations in civil life and enrolled themselves as real professional soldiers. A few months ago they were all civilians, clerks, working men in different trades, agricultural labourers and so forth. But three or four months' training has made them fit for professional soldiery. Of course, they are not yet to be sent to the front and they have come to India to complete their training. But we learn from the Bombay papers that the men look every inch of them well trained British soldiers. As one paper observes, "smart in appearance, of fine physique, upstanding and frank and free in their method of expressing themselves, they impressed one as real good fighting men, soldiers not in embryo, but 'fashioned and made,' and ready and able to do any task which may be assigned to them."
Price of food grains AT Saturday's meeting of the Lahore Municipal Committee, the rise in the price of food grains formed the subject of anxious consideration of members. Mr. Tollinton called for suggestions to relieve distress. It was found that exporting firms were buying on a calculation of Rs. 48 per maund including freight and other charges, which was equivalent to a market rate of Rs. 42.6 per maund, or about 9 ½ seers. The general impression was that Lahore did not hold any large stocks but that it was largely dependent on imports and that the effect of requiring a fixed rate in the local market was to keep away grain altogether.
|
Merkel’s opportunity to lead Europe Germany's
commemoration of the fall of the Berlin Wall on its 25th anniversary was notable on many counts. For one thing, Germans gave the feeling that they had grown up, having paid their debt to history — a striking Holocaust Memorial in the heart of Berlin adorns the capital — and increasing numbers of Jews are congregating again in Berlin. I was in Berlin on June 22, 1990, when Checkpoint Charlie, the official entry and exit point between East and West Berlin, was demolished. There was some nostalgia and much excitement in the air as Easterners and Westerners massed local trains to see what was until days ago the forbidden fruit. But the commemoration this time had a larger meaning because it was a signal that Germans had finally come of age and had shaken off their past. Diligently and quietly, Germans had built up their economy from the ravages of the war, giving the French political salience in the European Economic Community, which morphed into the European Union. In the process, Germany, after adroitly helping the United States bless the country's reunion through deft moves to exploit the phenomenon of Mikhail Gorbachev, became one nation. Significantly, Mr Gorbachev was present in Berlin on the 25th anniversary to invite grateful shouts of “Gorby, Gorby” from a nostalgic crowd. Germany had meanwhile become the most important and powerful player in the European Union symbolised by Chancellor Angela Merkel, but still seemed weighed down by its past. In fact, she exercised power with a sure and deft touch without throwing her weight around. The traditional perception of a meek power house was officially left untouched until some hard decisions made clear to the cognoscenti who the boss was. Now that Germany has shaken off many of its inhibitions after the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, it is willing to take its rightful place on the world stage. In partial recognition of new reality, the powerful had made a niche for it through the formula of Five plus One permanent members of the UN Security Council. The long overdue expansion of this key body is tied up with bringing in such deserving countries as India and Japan, which is being vetoed by China. There is opposition too from other countries such as Pakistan and Italy that will be left out. Now that Germany is wearing the hat of being the most important country in Western Europe in economic and political terms, what will be the consequences? There are two immediate crises facing the world today: the ongoing struggle between Russia and the West over the fate of Russian-supported opponents of Kiev in eastern Ukraine and the series of crises in the four-year-old civil war in Syria and the inter-ethnic catastrophe in Iraq upstaged by the emergence of the ISIS morphed into the Islamic State (IS). Ms Merkel has been surprisingly severe towards Russia on Ukraine in terms of leading the sanctions regime. But her attitude is different from the United States’ because she represents continuing German ambivalence towards the West's most important opponent in Europe. To begin with, Russia was an important German market and the sanctions have hurt Berlin as well, as recent trade figures clearly show. But beyond that, as the popularity of Mr Gorbachev in Germany demonstrates, there is gratitude for the crucial role he played in the peaceful reunification of the two Germanies. In another important respect, Berlin and the United States differ in their geopolitical perspectives. What Mr Gorbachev warned in his address to Berliners of American triumphalism after the end of the Cold War and the danger of beginning a new Cold War was an expression of support to Russia's President Vladimir Putin in less combative terms. Despite appearances, there is greater consciousness in Berlin than Washington that the West led by the United States may have gone overboard in cementing an anti-Moscow alliance after the disintegration of the Soviet Union. Perhaps because of the closer interactions between Germans and Russians — Ms Merkel herself was brought up in East Germany and speaks Russian — there is greater understanding of the consequences of poking the Russian bear in the eye. After all, it is plain to see why Moscow under Mr Putin, as opposed to the weak hand Boris Yeltsin had to play against Washington - is upset over bringing the great landmass adjoining Russia, Ukraine, into the European Union and ultimately NATO. Given the common features of the two countries’ relationship in language, religion, folklore and ethic ties, the Western diktat to absorb Ukraine was bound to create problems. Ukraine itself is divided between the West and the East of the country although many are, of course, attracted by the bright lights of the West. It must also be placed on record that the West took the Russian annexation of Crimea largely in its stride, given that it was part of the Soviet Union gifted by Soviet President Nikita Khrushchev to Ukraine and consisted in large part of Russian speakers keen on rejoining the motherland. It was also the base of the Russian Black Sea fleet. East Ukraine, of course, is a different question and Russian support to the rebels there is to make the point that the eastern region should enjoy a great measure of autonomy in a federal structure. Instead, Kiev has taken a step back in negating its limited autonomy previously announced. The world will hope that Ms Merkel’s hard-headed realistic approach and the change in the German psyche will lead her to take a new approach to Ukraine. She would certainly enjoy much support at home - not only from the business lobby — if she were to change direction to a more understanding policy towards Russia. Despite the less than spectacular economic condition of the European Union and the gusty political winds of change from a cornered British Prime Minister David Cameron facing elections at home, the future of the great idea of the grouping is not as bleak as it might seem. The rejuvenation of Germany on its 25th anniversary gives Ms Merkel an opportunity to take Europe forward.
|
|||
Watching language change “Ancient attitudes to grammar still survive: many people are in awe of it ... and yet a minority is fascinated by it: a field in which precise scholarship and nit-picking pedantry have co-existed for centuries.” 1. To whom have you sent the
message? Preference for the use of “who” over “whom” has been on a constant rise for a very long time. But “whom” does appear occasionally as a style marker in written English, more often in British English than in American. Sentences like the one above are standard English but their use is confined to formal contexts. It is sentences such as “Who have you sent the message to” which are used more often. 2. Everyone passes their test easily. Through the centuries, it had been common to use “they” as a singular to avoid gender issues till some grammarians prescribed “they” and its associates “them” and “theirs” as plurals. By the 1960s, the conflict had been resolved and “he” had got established as the generic pronoun for “he” and “she”. But in the 1990s, the gender-neutral “he” turned into a gender debate. To handle both the singular/ plural debate and the gender debate, words like “themself” were suggested, as in “Everyone makes their coffee themself”. The matter is yet not near settlement. 3. The curtain's colour has faded. Using the apostrophe “s” in place of “of phrases” to show possession with inanimate nouns has been an area of dispute for some time. The “of-construction” had been the main choice to show possession in such situations, as in “the price of the table” and not “the table’s price”. The apostrophe “s” was preferred in the context of living things. But in the past few decades, the apostrophe “s” has gained currency with inanimate objects. 4. Selma hugged Sue as if she were her own daughter. The use of “were” (the plural of “was”) with a singular subject to signal a hypothetical situation now belongs almost exclusively to the formal written style of British English. Similar is the case of the construction “I suggest that he talk to his teacher”. To avoid the form “he talk”, British English often introduces minor modifications, as in “I suggest that he should talk to the teacher”. It is easier for vocabulary to find acceptability but changes in grammar can sometimes take centuries to assimilate with standard language. Education is the custodian of correct language behaviour — which makes it mandatory for students and teachers, in particular, to consult standard grammar books and dictionaries while welcoming change.
|
|||
CINEMA: NEW Releases Film Kill/ Dil
Old wine in new bottles…most cinegoers by now perhaps know that most Hindi films are exactly that. So, expecting anything different from Kill Dil, whose peppy promos had upped the expectations quotient, was perhaps asking for the moon. So, early on in the movie we settle for less. And so should you and ask the only question that is worth asking — how new is the bottle really? Well, you sure have dear Govinda in a new avatar. He plays the bad guy Bhaiya, which you can call a pseudonym for bhai. And we all know what bhais do…kill all and sundry for a price. Now for the storyline…he has raised two orphans. If you have been keeping tabs on the film, you must be aware who these bachhas are. For the cinematically challenged, well, they are Pakistani actor-singer Ali Zafar and our very own star Ranveer Singh, who carry out suparis on Bhaiyaji’s behalf. So, you get your fair share of kill element, minus the adrenaline rush of course. Indeed, never mind that the killer instinct is singularly missing, the film packs quite a few kills. And as many songs, which, to be honest, don’t kill you with its music (good job by Shankar, Ehsan, Loy), but certainly annoy you with their annoying frequency. Yes, yes there is a dil too. It belongs to Ranveer and goes dhak dhak when he spots Parneeti Chopra, a well-heeled educated girl. Here, she dons a glam-doll look which does nothing to lift the film or her talent, which we all know she possesses in abundance. Reverting to the film plot, her heart too goes aflutter, of course for reasons best known to her. But the most obvious one is, Ranveer plays the daredevil to save her. And for her sake again gives up the daredevilry. Predictably, Bhaiay ji is not amused. As he doesn’t take kindly to one of his favourite protégés turning a new leaf, the narrative chugs on the predictable and a trifle novel path too. Indeed, the only thing that saves the film from becoming an out-and-out killjoy is that it doesn’t digress too much. And it is shorn off unnecessary clutter. So, there is no love angle in Zafar’s life. Nor is there unwanted change of Bhaiya ji’s heart. Undeniably, Govinda shows spark as the badman benefactor of the young fellows. His character too is consistent. And of course, in the title track, he moves his body as only he can. Alas, the narrative doesn’t move you at any level. Neither with its romance, nor with its supposed emotional USP. Emotional connect actually simply goes for a toss. If Ranveer’s dilemma doesn’t cut much ice, Ali Zafar is completely wasted. Their friendship, the supposed rock-bed of the film — except for a few smart one liners in the beginning mouthed by Zafar — comes nowhere close to the N number of warm and wonderful friendships immortalised on silver screen. And we aren’t referring to Sholay here. So, after some kill-dil, pyar wayar, goli voli, the film ends on such a tame note that you are completely foxed, almost tempted, to knock yourself on your head. If you have the time and money to spare, go find out why minor cosmetic changes in an antiquated storyline won’t make for good cinema. Our advice: it’s certainly not worth a while. Unless you have got used to lowering the bar and developed an appetite for stale concoctions served in brand new glasses…stay away. Or, are you curious to spot the differences between Kill Dil and killjoy?
|
|||
|
Thought-provoking human drama
Film Boyhood
Boyhood is all about growing up in America around the 1950s. Director Richard Linklater sticks to this one family and its travails for just over a decade of 'voluptuous panic' that passes for the American way of life. When the story begins, Olivia (Patricia Arquette) is divorced with two kids, Samantha (Lorelei Linklater) and Mason Jr. (Ellar Coltrane). She then goes to college to improve her situation, but goes through a number of liaisons (one marriage) that have an adverse effect on the children. Mason Sr (Ethan Hawke), the father, has visiting rights and takes the children camping. When Samantha has a boyfriend, he speaks to her about contraception and wants them to learn from his mistakes. Director Richard Linklater, who took eleven years to make the film, does well to bring out various pressures and pulls, especially the adolescent years when boys brag of female conquests. Mason takes an interest in photography while Samantha just drifts. He even experiences signs of nihilism, tending to mumble instead of speaking. But, thankfully, his photography wins him a scholarship and he moves on. Olivia is distraught and left alone. It is indeed a touching scene. Music is used well for dramatic effect and the viewer is kept going most of the time. Ella Coltrane is promising and Patricia Arquette goes through a whole gamut of emotions; Ethan Hawke is the best of the lot in this thought-provoking human drama well worth-watching.
|
|||
|
One-man army
Film John Wick
Meet John Wick (Keanu Reeves), a cold-blooded killer who does what he does best like swatting flies (no gory close-ups) in this film by the same name. John has just lost his wife, who has posthumously gifted him a cute pup Daisy to help him get over his grief. That night the trio visits John's house and destroy furniture before killing Daisy. We now see the seemingly placid John erupt, but not before meeting the Russian kingpin Viggo, who tries to pacify him in vain. Viggo beats up his spoilt, loser son Josef for meddling with John. Up until now, director Chad Stabalski busies himself with the establishing shots and little knick-knacks. Now the fireworks begin with one-man army John decimating his opponents, making James Bond look ancient. For colour, we also have a pretty killer Ms Perkins (Adrianne Pacino) join the gang. Keanu Reeves goes through his role mechanically and he is ably supported by Michael Nykvist who makes a good villain right up the climactic fight. Willem Dafoe and John Leguizamo as usual provide good cameos in this action-heavy entertainer.
|
|||
|
Miscalculation
Film 6-5=2 It’s become a fad of sorts to claim ‘found footage’ mechanics for peddling horror. This film is no different. Ever since The Blair Witch Project found a strong foothold among horror aficionados, there’s been a flurry of such projects both in Hollywood as well as Bollywood. Aiming to recreate that success story, it’s been a rough ride for most but the really ingenious. The film doesn’t have much of the genre thrills usually associated with horror movies. The scares (if that is what you would call it) come at the fag end of the film and the few flighty tricks employed to build up on tension fail to pass muster. The joking around by the gang also comes across as tasteless. The dialogues sound discontinuous. If at one point a character reveals something, a few minutes later the conversation takes a turn that sounds contrary. There’s nothing natural or really ‘found’ about this entire defeatist exercise. It all appears a little too fake and orchestrated, without much finesse, to make the cut as even a ‘C’ grade horror flick.
|
|||
|
Saturday, November 15
& PICTURES CINEMA TV HBO MOVIES OK STAR GOLD STAR MOVIES ZEE CINEMA ZEE CLASSIC Sunday, November 16 & PICTURES CINEMA TV MOVIES OK STAR GOLD STAR MOVIES ZEE CINEMA ZEE CLASSIC ZEE STUDIO
|
|
| 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 | |
Change
9:00pM star gold
10:25AM zee studio