The Day when Right became wrong

Those were the days when King Parikshit is the ruler of the state. Its nearly 36 years after King Yudhistara left the kingdom to his grandson Parikshit to heavenly abode. Kali Purusha, who is the lead man for Kali Yuga did not dare to start his influences when Yudhistara was the king. Such was the power of the satvik and dharmic king.

A case was brought to King’s court for justice. Ramu and Somu were the parties to the case. Ramu sold his farm land to Somu few days and while ploughing the land Somu found a pot full of gold. Somu felt that the gold is legal propriety of Ramu as he merely paid for the land and not for the wealth underneath. Similarly Ramu felt that as the farm land is no longer his, the legal owner of the gold must be Somu. Both Ramu and Somu refused to lay hands on gold. King was pleasantly surprised at the Dharmic life his people are leading. He, how ever, wanted to give the case profound thought before delivering justice and so asked Ramu and Somu to assemble next morning in the court. Little did he know that the night would bring up new surprise at that point.

Kali purusha who was silent till that point sensed his time to exercise influence influence over people has finally come. He has got into minds of the people and started making them deviate from Dharmic life. Deviation from Dharmic life is first trait of Kali.

Next morning when the King appeared the case was completely different. Now both Ramu and Somu are fighting to become legal owners of the gold. King sensed something wrong as previous day they were relinquishing gold for same of Dharma. Serious contemplation and discussion with pundits gave him hint that Kali Yuga has started. He then ordered the gold to be handed over to king’s treasury, as any disputed property goes as per Dharma. He also put necessary steps in place to keep Kali in check. But all have gone in drain as Kali grew stronger and stronger.

I Hate Luv Stories

Disclaimer:This is not a movie review

There is no denying that I hate the concept of boy-girl love in the first place. Time and again I am reminded of this hatred in my subconscious mind through day to day experiences. This time a latest movie has reminded me of it. I just wanted to inspect why I hate love concept and this is what i came up with.

Platonic Love rarely exist:
Every time I hear love my eyes filter the content and transmit it to my brain as lust. It is not with out reason. Every love story we see begins with a good looking girl. People say love is something connected to heart. Surprisingly, most people fall in love with god looking girls only. So it says something that love is not merely heart oriented, it has substantial weightage to physical appearance.

Cheating of parents:
In the name of love the boy and girl invent multitude of excuses with parents to conceal the affair. They invent stories to be with lover and make poor parents buy those insane excuses. A boy who does not have an ounce of concern for parents declares he has an ocean of love for the girl he loves.

Decline in studies:
Studies usually take a huge hit due to juvenile love affairs. As the period during which love and study coincide, the youth pursue love rigorously than studies.

Nasty deeds: in name of love
Sad but unfortunate truth is that under the cover of love boys and girls are indulging in some nasty deeds that are inappropriate for their age and relation. Its painful to any decent human to elaborate on this and so closing it here.

Inter community:
As lovers pay more attention to physical and behavioral aspects only, most love affairs happen to start between people who belong to different communities. Conservative parents in India find it difficult to approve such love affairs and subsequent step of marriage outside their community.

Deception of Love:
Youth when in love trust the partner wholeheartedly. If one person in the couple has crooked intention then the life of the other would be at jeopardy. Mostly girls are at receiving end of this (through premarriage pregnancy or physical attacks by boys).

Is being good same as never been caught doing wrong?

This is one of the lines of thought I had been thinking for last couple of months. Some of us pamper saying "I am a good person". People agree to what we say if they never found us doing any wrong deed and people disagree if we are caught doing something wrong in the past. Question here is, just because no one caught doing wrong in past, do we become good person. Is the nature of good defined by the society or the people surrounding us? Not very difficult to answer this question. Nevertheless I would like to grab this first chance to drive point home.

Society driven:
Society or other people can declare a person good or bad. I cant agree to the point that society can alone decide what is good and what is not. My gut feeling is with the way things are transitioning now-a-days we are not far away from the day when wrong would be declared by society as good and vice versa. I am reminded of a small story in this context

An old brahmin is taking home a goat as dakhsina for performing puja. Three thieves saw the poor fellow and wanted to have the goat from him for dinner. When the brahmin is on his way back home with goat, first thief stops him and asks why he is carrying a dog home. Brahmin dismissed his claim saying it is a goat. A while later, second thief encounters him and asks why he is taking a donkey home. Brahmin evidently taken aback by such comments, dismissed for second time such remark. Sometime later third thief stops the brahmin and asks what he is going to do with the mule he is carrying home. Brahmin was aghast by such remark and begins thinking that he is taking home a ghost which is appearing like goat, dog, mule and donkey to different people and discards the goat. Thieves make merry with goat meat for dinner.

Individual driven:
If society cant be trusted, can we rely on individual for deciding what is good and what is not? Not completely. A learned man who does not contradict with what is mentioned in dharma shatras can be trusted for deciding what is good and what is not. Even the learned sages like Gautama and Manu who have drafted Dharma shastras, clearly stated in them that if they by mistake contradict anywhere with Veda then the Veda takes overriding precedence. Problem with relying fully on individual's decision on what is good and what is not is, people have innate tendency to justify the wrong deeds with some emotional or logical reasoning to make them look good. Just the way it is shown in movies, hero turns into thief and it would be justified by circumstances or hero marries heroin against will of parents in the name of sacred love. But the justification does not make a wrong deed right.

Then what is good:
Vedas form the basis for the acts individuals have to perform as per the context they are in (varna as well as ashrama) and deeds which are banished. How ever as Vedas are not easily accessible to everyone, great sages who have digested gist of the Vedas came up with Dharma Shashtras. These are easily accessible information for every one to know what is right and what is not. These deeds when followed to the spirit can be termed as good acts.

Final word:
I wud like to conclude this article with a small story, which I probably repeatedly told to some of you folks.

A teacher has imparted all the knowledge required to his pupil and while sending them back home he wanted to understand how many understood the content clearly. He called his students and gave each of them a banana to eat with a precondition that it should be eaten when no one is watching. One student went into a closed room and sat under the bed while eating it. Other student went into a forest and ate it sitting on a branch of tree. Other student went into pond and ate it while swimming. But the best student did not eat the banana and came to the guru. When questioned abt it, he replied that he could not eat it as no matter how far he has gone, there is God Almighty watching what he is doing. Guru felt proud and declared thats the gist of the education he imparted and so he is extremely confident that his student will not perform any wrong deed anytime as he knows clearly that God i watching him all the time.

Vedam – Movie Review

This is not a commercial flick. Its more of an experimental class that are rare in telugu film industry. It does not surprise me that it came from the director of Gamyam, another good movie.

Story:
Do not get me wrong. It is definitely not first of its kind. Five different stories hanging linked to a single climax. Hollywood has them, bollywood has them and I am sure other “Regionalwoods” have them. But it is relatively new to Tollywood. Trust me it is not easy to handle such subjects as audience would be lost in so many different threads. So the ambitious project was not very much perfect but it is decently made script.

Narration:
Krish tired his best and surely bettered himself in the art but not quite perfect. As I mentioned earlier it is not easy. There are some parts in movie where either audience get bored or lost. That’s one of the reasons why it cant become box office record getter movie sorts. Other reason being it does not stick to tired and tested 5 songs, 5 fights and/or 2 heroin and one hero concept. But I am glad that telugu movies are coming up with multistarrer movies with Novel subjects. Krish may be accused of trying to handle too many problems at on go, but to be honest he just tried to portray all the problems and did not ambitiously try to offer solutions. (Like Posani does in his movies by offer bizarre solutions to long impending problems thankfully)

Performances:
Allu Arjun:
He is a smart guy. I started realizing it as I just made a recap of his films. He is doing commercial formula based films, message oriented ones and now some novel multi-starrer. I am guessing over a period of time, he would end up having some nice memoirs than some of his peers. He enacted role of cable raju. He has done decent action clubbed with subtle comedy and carried the film very well. If you have watched climax scenes of movie named Happy then you would instantly recognize that he has improved a lot in enacting emotions. Way to go Arjun!

Anuskha:
She is beautiful and did justice to the role. I wont discuss whole lot about her character but she depicts some problems of sex workers.

Manchu Manoj:
There is no debate about this guy that he is any day better than his brother. But this movie surely brought some of his best action. His portrayal as rock star was near perfect, though at times his emotions betrayed him.

Manoj Bajpai:
We have seen his talent in movie Satya itself and he has enacted role of a muslim who gets bad outing in India and wants to leave country. He did justice to his role and very well supported by the lady who enacted his wife.

Nagayya:
Some true taste what poverty in India is like is depicted in character of Nagayya. I could see some missing lipsync at times but expressions were extraordinary. The scenes where he tries to protect his money from thief and the scene where he celebrates recovered lost cash touch heart of even rocks. He will be my pick for best supporting actor in the movie. His daughterinlaw character also is well enacted of a poor mother who sells kidney for son’s education.

Music:
Music from Keeravani is good. I did not listen to any songs before going for the movie. I fell flat with fist song “Now or Never”. I immediately recognized it is written by Sirivennela SeethaRama Sastry. All songs made sense lyrically.

Overall:
It is a movie that needs to be watched once at least.

Wimbledon Final with out Roger :-(

To say the least, it is painful to a fan to watch a Wimbledon Final with out Roger Federer’s participation. We got so used to it, for past seven years to see him in grandslam finals and more so if the slam in question is wimbledon.

In many ways Wimbledon is one slam which is precious. Tennis as a game reaches pinnacle of beauty at this place. In contrast to hard hitting baseline gamers, beautiful Serve and Volley gamer prevails a lot at Wimbledon. Pete Sampras reigned this place before Roger Federer broke lose to the Tennis scene as dominant force. Roger has shown signs of future in 2001 when he sent Pistol Pete home in 2001 Wimbledon. Not many at that point have done that to Sampras. People would have realized a prospect there but not many would have thought the guy would go on to become greatest Tennis player ever to hold a racket.

It is 2003 where Roger laid hands on his first slam and so fittingly at Wimbledon. Post Sampras era Tennis world has seen some Hewitt’s and Roddick’s but they were either not consistent or not all round in their game or showed signs of champion. I almost stopped watching Tennis after Sampras left scene. I would have committed a biggest blunder if I did so because Tennis world has witnessed a great phenomenon couple of years later an the champion has appeared. Champion in truest sense and more complete than Pete Sampras.

2004 is the year where Roger bagged three of the four slams of the year which Pete Sampras also has not managed. Show did not stop there. In 2005 he bagged two. In 2007 and 2008 he repeated feat he has achieved in 2004 and additionally he reached finals of French open both the years, only two lose both to greatest clay player named Nadal.

Roger is one way responsible for raising expectations on him. 2008 year was considered as low year for him and people said and written that Roger’s time is over. As Andy Murray pointed out end of 2008, Roger has semi final of Australian open, two finals at French and Wimbledon and Won US open, which is a great achievement. But, definitely not by Roger’s standard. Biggest pain that year was losing Wimbledon, which is more Roger’s home since 2003.

When every one is writing off Roger, he has other plans. He came back strongly in 2009 by breaking Pete’s record of maximum slams along with bagging French slam which eluded him for 4 years and also gaining back Wimbledon. Some may argue that he was lucky to be helped by injury of Rafa Nadal in the process. But there is no argument against Roger being second best Clay player and would have bagged 4 more of them if not for Nadal.

2010 is a bit painful for fans because we cannot find him in Wimbledon final. It has become a habit to look at Roger’s matches only after semi final stage because for more than 5 years till semifinal stage games looked more of a formality. This year was completely different and more so in Wimbledon when he struggled in first round. I am not writing an obituary here but after the first round match there was a strange feeling in the stomach that this year he is not going to win it. But like many others I thought, he would lose it to Nadal or Murray in the final but quarterfinal exit to a man whose match I never matched earlier is something that pained me.

Season of slams takes a break now till year end US open. Sincerely hoping Roger to compensate for what has happened at French and Wimbledon at Newyork later this year. It is not too easy though, with old horses like Hewitt and Roddick rediscovering their mojo and “generation next” in form of Nadal, Murray, Djokovic, del Potro trying to deny the throne to the King. Hope the King Returns.

Saptapadi - Movie Review

Most important part of Hindu marriage is taking seven steps in unison for nourishment, strength, prosperity, happiness, progeny, long life and friendship. The seven elements form most important expectations from the couple through rest of the life and any missing element cannot complete a marriage. K. Viswanath’s Saptapadi is an attempt to give rational behind marriage than performing it as boring routine. He also boldly challenges the varna mentioned in Manu Dharma Shastra.

It is routine to give reviews for new releases but it is little strange to pick up a movie that is released decades ago and did not too well in box office. But the attempt made by the great director was sensational and is a beauty. It is certainly bold because any challenge posed to marriage system that is so firmly understood by Indians. So I had picked it up.

Storyline:

Story revolves around a priest family who by hereditary as well as performance gains right to become priests of Goddess Durga temple. JV Somayajulu, an orthodox priest is the central point in the tale. He is orthodox to such an extent that he relinquishes his daughter for marrying against his wish, despite the fact daughter married Brahmin man. He nurtures his grandson (Son’s Son) with all the devotional relation and makes him priest in Goddess Durga temple. When he learns that his daughter-in-law (daughter’s daughter) has become classical dancer and learnt the art with dedication, he decides to have her married to his grandson and marriage is performed under his supervision.

Daughter-in-law, the heroin, falls in love with another man before marriage thinking that he is a Brahmin. When she finds out that he belongs to lower caste and when she does not have courage to fight the society nor the orthodox grand father, she agrees to marriage. Even her lover, the hero, supports the marriage as he thoroughly understands that his love cannot stand the will of the society.

After marriage when heroin’s husband comes to her room during night, she appears to him like the Godess Durga and so instead of touching her he starts performing puja to the wife every night. When JV Somayajulu understands whole story and taking advice from his buddy Allu ramalingayya, both he and his grandson decide to send the girl to her lover.

Direction:

It is a very delicate story line and directors skill is exposed while handling such topics. Narration was handled too well to ensure that message is passed correctly and no wrong message was cut across. K. Viswanath’s story based flick was made beautifully even though there is no star cast in the movie. His love for keerthanas continues in this movie as well.

Highlights:
1) Climax scene where JV somayajulu justifies why his decision of sending the girl with the lover. He explains basic philosophy behind the caste system and marriage system and advices not to follow it blindly with out knowing the philosophy.
2) First night scene where the girl appears to the husband like Goddess Durga and husband performs puja.
3) The dance scene where JV smayajulu asks the grand daughter to perform while students are reciting Durga Suktam. Heroin is a classical dancer and has done well in the scene.
4) Allu Ramalingayya advising Somayajulu by narrating story of Adi Shankaracharya.
5) All songs are extraordinary but Govullu tellana song marks brilliance of S. Janaki

A must watch movie I would say. I recently purchased CD of the movie for my own collection.

Karma Yogi – King Janaka

Karma Yoga:Karma Yoga is widely discussed in many of scriptures including Bhagavadgita. In Gita, Lord Krishna explains Karma Yoga by stating that it is yoga by which person incessantly performs one’s duty/karma and still remains unattached to the results of Karma. He goes further by saying one’s duty would be decided by Vedas and Dharma Shastras through Varna – Ashrama Dharmas. Also Lord Krishna maintains that person has only right on performance on karma and not on the result to be attained by it. The person who remains unattached to the results of the karma can attain highest level of Philosophical maturity and is termed as Karma Yogi. The first and best example of Karma Yogi that comes to our mind is King Janaka.

King Janaka’s Story:
King Janaka got his education from two renowned guru’s namely Sage Vashista and Sage Astavakra.

Sage Asta Vakra:
Not many people know story of Asta Vakra. When he is in mother’s womb he used to listen to Veda being recited by his father daily. Once due to some ill health his father recited a swara of Veda incorrectly. The kid in the mother’s womb responded to his father by showing his fault in recitation. His father got angry with him and curses him to have 8 deformities in his body and he is called as AstaVakra.

Once King Janaka announces grand prize for person who can teach him brahma vidya( the highest education). Also he puts a condition that such education should be imparted to him in a timeframe equal to mounting a horse back and punishes ones who cannot do so. Astavakra comes forward and mentions that he can teach that to the king but before that King must show that he is eligible to learn it by accepting him as Guru. King agrees to this condition and maintains that he would do anything Astavakra asks him. Astavakra takes him to near by forest and asks Janaka to start mounting horseback. When Janaka put his first foot on horse to get ready for mounting, AstaVakra asks him to stop in same position until he comes back. Janaka with superior respect for guru, remains in same position for a year. When Astavakra comes back later to realize the guru bhakti of disciple imparts education to Janaka. That text has come to be known as Astavkra Gita. (I have a copy of it but don’t know if I have adequate intelligence to comprehend it)

Sage Vashista:

King Janaka was one of the favorite disciples of Vashista. Guru used to wait till Janaka comes to start his lessons, a rare privilege he granted to no other student. Fellow students used to think that Guru is partial to Janaka as he is a king. Brahmarshi Vashista understood this and wanted to show the students truth. Once when Vashista is giving lecture to students, fire broke out and all students started running to safe guard their belongings. But Janaka was so immersed in the lecture that he did not even realize that fire broke out. Thus Vashista through a fake fire created demonstrates why Janaka was superior to his other students.

Karma Yogi:
King Janaka was childless for long. He belonged to Videha Vamsa meaning he has no attachment to deha(body). At the same time, he continued performing the karma (yagnas) suggested by Vedas to get child. While performing a Yagna he is blessed Mahalakshmi as kid. He took it as God’ blessing. He got Lord Rama as his son-in-law but he did not go overboard with joy. When he discovered that his son-in-law and daughter were sent to forest, he did not get angry or depressed. When his son-in-law and daughter got universally renowned, he did not feel elation of pride. He remained perfectly calm be it happiness or sorrow but at the same time he did not leave his duty. That’s how Janaka remained perfect example for Karma Yogi.

Tangential Thought

My best friend and I talk most often about some off beat topics. One of them is regarding our intelligence coming in the way of realization. Realization here means the ultimate goal of human life from philosophical stand point. We can confidently say we are relatively intelligent guys. My friend may be a ten or dozen times smarter than me. I am not that bad either. We keep wondering if the rational thinking imparted by English style of education has killed our natural Indian instinct and coming in way of realization.

We have faith in Indian traditions and like many people we make our own convenience as priority when following them. Like any science and engineering graduate, we use reasoning and proofs to believe things. We studiously read Newton’s laws of action and reaction and Darwin’s theory of evolution. No matter how idiotic it appears to believe that my great great…. Grand dad was a monkey!! We have never seen any proofs Darwin provided to solidify such belief but still because my teacher said it, I believed it to be true. But when some one tells me that God exists, we ask for proof. We became so proof oriented that even if God himself comes to us, we would ask him to prove himself. If proof must again fall in line with the cinematic versions we have seen and should be magical. Even if He succeeds doing that, we doubt him like we doubt many babas in the world.

English model of education did us more bad than good. Worst is now being done by educational system. Ramayana cant be taught in school stating that it is a religious text. But they do not realize that Ramayana teaches how chastity and uprightness are more important. Ramayana teaches following Dharma is most important which is surely essence of every religion. Ramayana teaches making right friendship is going make your life (through tale of Sugriva). English model teaches us history. Most of it is adopted from what West has given us. West cannot agree that Ramayana is history, because they cannot agree we had God in name of Rama before Christ existed. They call Ramayana as myth and term it as mythology than history.

Anyways coming back to original question of how do we understand God exists at all, reminds me a small story.There is a small story accredited to Adi Shakaracharya. Adi Shankara walked on this earth at a time when Buddhism was at its peak and people started questioning the Vedic Dharma. Buddhism in reality is nothing but one aspect of Vedic Dharama namely Sanyasa and so is never complete in itself. Religion was really solidified due to great personality of Gautama Buddha. How ever, it got diluted because of lack leadership which failed to take the spirit of Buddhism forward and blindly maintaining that it is against Hindu customs. It lead to Charvaka tradition who challenge existence of God himself. Shankara encountered a person who challenged existence of God. His contention was God does not exist and if Shankara thinks “He” exists he will believe only if Shakrcharya can show God to him. Shankara uses Tharka (logic) to counter him. Here is the dialogue

Shankara: Have you ever seen King of the country?
Charvaka: No
Shankara: So can you say that King of the country does not exist at all because you have not seen him?
Charvaka: No. But we get orders from him on regular basis
Shankara: Similarly we do get orders from God. How o you know that Orders are coming from King only?
Charvaka: There are his subordinates who have actually seen him
Shankara: Similarly there are people called rishis who have seen Almighty and proposed same in scriptures
Charvaka: I can’t believe those scriptures they are just doctored to cheat people.
Shankara: Let’s apply same logic to King’s case, if I challenge you that King does not exist and it is act of few people to cheat rest of us?
Charvaka: No. It cant be same analogy because I can show you King.
Shankara: Similarly I can show you God.
Charvaka: Ok Show me now.
Shankara: Can you show me the King if I say I wont travel all the way to Capital city?
Charvaka: No. You will have to come to Capital city.
Shankara: Even if I come to capital city and do not come near the King’s fort, can you show him?
Charvaka: No You have to come to King’s fort.
Shankara: Even if I come to King’s fort, can I directly get access to King?
Charvaka: No. You will need some sort of recommendation or authority to meet the King.
Shankara: Say for example I some how chanced to meet the King, if I close my eyes when he is around, can you show me ?
Charvaka: No. You have to keep your eyes wide open to see the king.
Shankara: Even after seeing the King if I say that I don’t believe that he is the King, is there something you can do?
Charvaka: No
Shankara: For a ruler of single kingdom, if so much of procedure to see, what can you say of the ruler of whole universe?
Charvaka: hmm
Shankara: I can show you God. But you will have to put effort by performing rituals, meditation and japa. You need to perform Karma (Vedic duty) in order to purify your body and soul and make it ready to see the God. An then you will have to make attempt through Tapasya (meaning desirous) for seeing the God. After reaching the rightful rigor in your Tapasya you will be ready to see the God. Then only you can see God.

Marriage Market – A first hand experience

Context:
When my dad was planning for a visit to near by gathering of parents of prospective brides and grooms, I did not pay much attention. I thought it was a routine visit they wanted to pay. My first shock came when my dad wanted me to neatly dress up for the occasion so that I can impress some prospective bride. I never believed in quick marriages. I protested, threatened my dad with small threats and also tried recommendation from my mom. None of them worked. I made up my mind for a brand new experience.

The Place:
Place is crowded with hundreds of people, mostly parents of the girl/boy. We were given a book with the list of girls/boys registered were given and each one is assigned a number. There is a stage in the centre where the organizers were sitting and announcing details of person along with his/her preferences. We are also asked to fill some application where we can apply to 5 girls of our choice from the list. The application would be read out aloud so that they come to meet us.

Announcement:Most of the applications being read out are of boys and painfully for them none from the girls side turned. Announcements started taking shape of mini market where the strong point of the good for sale is being reiterated for takers benefit. I would have thought none from girls’ side turned up or something. As I chanced to sit beside a girls parent, I could not take such a premise. Every time they announce their number, they started pretending it is not theirs.

All of a sudden they started reading out details of girls and their requirements. Mostly requirements went as salary > 60K pm or US/UK/Canada/Australia working and/or preferences were for those men working for reputed IT companies and/or IIT/IIM grads.(I cursed them for not printing my college name against my details ). Some announcements looked gross to me when they started announcing the pay packet girl is taking home and trying to tempt the takers. There was an announcement where the girl wanted to find some one who is already in Australia or ready to travel to Australia or at least willing to travel with her as dependent. As I am living alone I can’t say I am too bad at household chores and raised my hand. I am not sure if they genuinely ignored or they did not even notice. A moment later I was a relived man, as I remembered the attacks on Indian in Australia. Thank God!!

I felt the girls today giving men the taste of the medicine earlier generation boys given to girls. For a man who takes too much pride in himself like me, it would be too embarrassing if no takers are found, so I did not wait till my name is announced.  (It later turned out that there were few takers for me, though I guess most of them turned up because of the 7figure salary)

The End:Earlier marriages used to happen taking into consideration two items. One is Family history (up to 3 generations or 7 depending on convenience) and man’s accomplishment/prospective accomplishments. In practical scnerios following sloka in Sanskrit can be applied that says

Kanya varayathe rupam, matah vittam pitah srutam
Bandhavah kulamichanthi mrustanna mithare janah

Meaning girl selects a man by his looks and other physical attributes. Girl’s mother looks for money so that the daughter can be well off. Dad checks if the man has good conduct and is good at following Vedas in spirit. Other relatives see if the man belongs to same community or not. Rest only look only for marriage lunch/dinner.

Varudu - A Review

No kidding. I went to watch the movie just for the “Aidurojula pelli” Song. If someone is wondering why one would watch a movie for a single song, I am committing no greater sin than those who watch movie for a hero(male/female audience)/heroin(male audience). Recently one of my relative got married in the same model of 5day marriage. I was the unfortunate one who missed the fun. So my intent was to get compensated by the movie media. I was not much disappointed.

Storyline:
Let me start with a well known story. A Dharmic king was blessed with a great son. He got him married to a princess who is both beautiful and chaste. When the husband is away, a demon kidnaps the princess and locks up in his country and tortures her to fulfil his desire. Being a Chaste wife, she rejects the offer and keeps chanting husband’s name. Husband arrives and kills everyone including the demon and gets back his wife. They live happily there after. No marks for guessing, it’s our own Ramayana. Director Bapu had one such experiments of telling purana tales in social versions. (Mutyala Muggu – Uttara kanda of Ramayana and Kaliguga Ravanasurudu – Ramayana retold) There is slight connect to Ramayana in the story.

Story is about an about to be NRI boy who for a change leaves decision of marriage to his parents and the marriage proceedings comprise of the first half of the story. The bride gets kidnapped on very day of marriage and second half is sequence on how she was gotten back by her husband.

If audience are to be categorized as class and mass, first half is for class audience and second for mass.

Performances:

Gunasekar: I was happy with director for taking through first half very well especially marriage part. As I mentioned earlier my intent was only 5 day marriage. He fared very well in picturising it, probably as well as Krishnavamsi would have done. Most of the items were shown for brief moment but no significant mistakes were made. (including using plain cloth with swasthik instead of fancy writings people are using these days for separating bride and groom shows that necessary ground work was done.)

Second half I was annoyed. Gunasekar was notorious for his overdosage/usage of settings and graphics. He did same thing in second half even when there is no obvious need. Also too much violence in second half made it look little clumsy. Also opening lines by Chiru did not score any additional marks.

Arjun: He was soul of the movie and probably sole reason if it runs to success. He carried weight of the movie on his shoulder. His dance performances were as usual awesome though a bit routine by now. In emotional scenes he has matured a lot. (I still recollect emotional scene he has done in climax of movie Happy and felt yuck)

Bhanusri: She did justice to her role, considering this is her first movie. How ever, hiding her detail till end increased lot of curiosity among audience. Some of them imagined a brand new girl Aiswarya Rai was being screened and many of them were disappointed. In one way it is marketing failure than actress.

Support Crew: Suhasini has done well in her role. Refreshing to see Anitha Chowdary after along gap. I did not find a miscast in the crew. (even though I felt Geetanjali would be ideal fit for Arjun’s grandma’ role.) Brahmanandam did not add lot of value though.

Veturi & Manisharma: Best part of movie is the approx 15 min song and lot of credit goes to Veturi & Manisharma for the lyrics and variation in the song so that it does not bore audience.

Literature – My perspective

I just finished a telugu book named “Neela Pendli” by Kavi Samrat. The story line is not difficult to guess and if I have to write the story I will probably finish it in no more than 250 words. But the author spent a whole book on the subject. A small introspection on this gave me a lesson on what literature should comprise of, especially in modern days where Prabhandhas and Kavyas may not be sold even for a ruppe (or a penny/dollar if you are an NRI).

I treat myself as Ekalvya Shishya of the eminent author, even though I don’t think I am as bad as Ekalavya. The lesson I learnt is regarding essential components of literature namely psychology and philosophy

Psychology:

It’s not really enough to tell a story for a writer. One should be in a position to read the psychology of people. Story must try to reflect the reality. It is only when the reader identifies himself/herself with character. Characters author creates are like his own children. He must understand them fully, how they react a specific situation and how they
think in a given scenario. If the author can capture the train of thoughts to finer details, it can help connecting the reader.

Say for example in the story Neela (lead character) gets introduced to Umapathi. Neela’s trains of thoughts revolve around if Umapathi has any other intentions than mere friendship and knowledge sharing to her. She also thinks if he wants to marry her etc., These thoughts are so natural for a young girl of marriageable age. I beg your pardon here, I was told today’s girls thinking is lot different and Viswanatha tried to reflect thinking of girls of his time. My personal feeling certain things still exist in today as well but we may refrain from confessing. Similarly Umpathi who likes Neela starts thinking about his chances of getting married to Neela and analyses his family situation etc., I can guarantee that that’s how I would think if I encounter an eligible girl in my life.

Philosophy:

Catching the pulse of audience is the preliminary step for making sure they listen to what author says. Author should now have discretion to say the ‘right’ thing and so prerequisite is author should know what is ‘right’. For knowing what is right, one needs to do lot of study. Even a knowledgeable person like Viswanatha studied history for few years before starting his novels on historical background. Intent is simple, One cannot afford to make mistake in works that may last forever.

So what is right? In Hindu Dharma, Vedas are the basis. There are Dharma Shastras that prophesize what is right and what is wrong. There are puranas which give examples of people who have followed Dharma. It is always recommended to follow these to arrive at what is right. Individual conscience must only supplement and not contradict the above texts. Even great Manu/Gautama in their dharma shastras mentioned that if at any point they contradict with Veda, it is taken that they are wrong. Reason is simple, Vedas are Rishis after contemplating each situation and making sure there are no perils. We through our thought may make mistake by presenting half baked truths.

Lets take a small example. These days many books/movies prophesize a statement “everything is fair in love and war”. I don’t know who coined this phrase but it has immediately become popular because it is a convenient excuse to all misdeeds we do. This is not supported by any of the texts I mentioned above. If one follows this literally, then it means “everything” including the recent acid attacks, rape, eloping, homicide, suicides are fair in love. But are they really?

So author must try to reflect the ultimate truth and not the half baked truth like the above.

Maro Charitra – Love Never Dies?

If you are a bit superstitious and a follower of trend of telugu films that borrowed the titles from good old time blockbusters, it is not difficult to notice that such new films did not do too well. Most of them looked like an insult to old movie including relatively well off Missamma_New. And if the new movie also borrowed story line from old movie, I need not mention that it is a terrible to take, especially when the most actors of the class of good old time act are either buried or never to silver screen. Dil Raju has taken such a terrible risk.

Storyline:

Story is in line with old Maro charitra, with due credit given veteran Director Balachandar in the titles. There are some lapses in the story, but they were introduced the new time story tellers by their creativity. Openers from heroin to hero about their love was narrated as if it was coming from previous birth, but never a solid foundation was made to such a context. Also many dialogues in the movie about greatness of love provoke more laughter than emotion. (Not just the case with person who does not admire philosophy of love, I happened to observe the same in general audience too)


Performances:

Dil Raju: Being a crowd puller and behind scenes hero of his movies, Dil Raju failed consecutively second time in his judgement. (I wont talk a word abt Josh movie here) He need not be briefed that current movie market cannot accommodate a tragic ending love story like Maro Charitra and so he made necessary amends to the story. But unfortunately the beauty of the story lies in the tragedy, and the amend made love concept look like a comedy.

Director: Not sure I remember his name, and heard that he is a cinematographer turned director. He did all justice to cinematography by picturizing some beautiful locations. But not quite so as director.

Prakash Raj: He loaned his voice to the movie and not seen on the screen. I strongly felt if he were present in the movie, it could have lifted the spirit on the whole. His voice did not have lot of conviction on all the words that explained greatness of love.

Varun: He did the job okay. Its cruel but when a parallel is drawn between legendary Kamal’s performance as Balu, he is no way near. His expressions could not sometimes project that he really does not understand telugu. Also his expressions on some emotional scenes could not betray audience, barring the glycerin used to get the tears. He has a long way to go in fact.

Anitha: Biggest mistake in the cast. She reminded me of Donald Duck every time she drew lips together. Her expressions in the first half of the movie really spoiled the plot. Even though second half performance was lot better, by then needed damage is already done.

Shraddha Das: Did well with out usual sex doll type characters. Not sure if some people were disappointed that she did not have any item song with skin show. I was happy on th contrary as such stupidity would have spoiled the screen play.

Varun’s Mother: She did her bit in inducing comedy to the movie in the first half. Especially her timing was good. I was a bit disappointed to see that no full scale comedian was used in the first half.

Urvasi: Entertained with her dialect for few minutes and bored audience with a stereotyped action.

Cheliyali Katta

I have seen many literature fans giving the laurels to “Maidanam” – book written by Chalam. Chalam famous for his feminist subjects shoots an arrow that hits on marriage tradition in its heart. In the novel through the character Rajeswari, chalam asks lots of questions on marriage system prevalent in India, some of them may be valid but most of them shot with half baked analysis. The novel surely created a sensation to such an extent that people started fearing the future of marriage system. In the novel heroin, Brahmin housewife, elopes with a muslim and prophesizes that marriage system as a whole is useless. She tries to pretend that free sex is the most ethical form of living relation between any male and female, just like the dogs do on the street. It is a pity that Chalam did not realize its problems, may be he has never seen the minimum problems dogs on street face. Many writers fought war against Chalam’s ideas in their subsequent books, but the best of them is Viswanatha’s Cheliyali katta.

Cheliyali katta is the limit the sea enforces on itself. Tides come from the sea as if they are going to submerge the earth but no matter how much force they come with sea ensures that they do not cross a limit. That limit is called Cheliyali Katta. Viswnatha counters Rajeswari of Chalam with Ratnavali in Cheliyali katta. Ratnavali answers all the questions raised by Rajeswari. Ratnavali is similar to Rajeswari, a Brahmin housewife who elopes with Rangadu, his husband’s brother, in search of true love or free love. Rangadu, who is corrupted at his own expense, by the college education thinks that marriage is a bondage to women. He is in one way innocent and ignorant and thinks that by freeing Ratnavali of his brother he is doing a great favor to her. He did not even realize that Ratnavali is in no bondage to be released but in a holy matrimony to be cherished. He corrupts her and gets corrupted in turn.

He elopes with her to city and tries to introduce her with many friends of his so that she can find true love in one of them. It reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me. My friend who lived in US for long time, came to India and got engaged during his vacation. His American boss in dismay asked him, “you got engaged with just one day interaction? I cant believe it. Say for example, you want to buy a car, how can you afford to buy it before test driving it?” It does not surprise me when an American says this. But the marriage in India is not an agreement for sex but it is a holy phenomenon where two individuals come together to lead their live inseparable in Dharma, Ardha, Kama. Moksha is not tied here, because that is pinnacle every one has to strive at his own effort. Rangadu, who is influenced by western ideas, thinks like the above American manager.

The turning point to the tale is when Rangadu wants to give education to Ratnavali and her introduction to teacher Mukunda Rao. Mukunda Rao imparts teaching to her Indian way. He chages her soul and makes her realize what an irrevocable mistake she has committed. She also realizes that with her corrupt body she cannot go back to her husband and ask for forgiveness. Every word she talks there after gives answers to Rajeswari’s questions. As she has no other means to live with her head up, she along with Rangadu commit suicide after giving her full property to her husband’s son.

Ratnavali confesses her mistake saying spoilt body that has been corrupted by means unacceptable by Sanatana Dharma” is better destroyed. Viswnataha who is lauded as doing service to Sanatana Dharma in great deal, has saved marriage system through his counter on Maidanam. It is real pleasure to read this master piece which gives logical counter to all questions raised on marriage.

3 Idiots: Analysis – Must Watch

A movie with a message packaged with subtle humor and mocking as well as commercial melodrama. Aamir Khan’s movie will have something in it. He may not be called Bollywood Badhshah but he is a special actor for bollywood who is breathing air to otherwise stale and dead bollywood movies. This movie is not in the moulds of artistic Lagaan or Taare Jameen Par or commercial Gajani. It is in line with his earlier flicks Dil Chahta hai and Dang De Bssanthi.

Performances:
Aamir aged 44, plays role of 22 year old Rancho in the movie. No doubt he looks little above that age, he made it so natural and energetic that no where in the movie his portrayal of student looked awkward. He carried the movie with such a charm that probably no other actor can do better than Aamir. Rancho is a natural genius who is passionate about science and applies with genuine creativity. Rancho takes a dig at current educational system and mocks the so called premier institutes which are consistently manufacturing money earning machines but failing in nurturing innovation and innate creativity of so called brightest talent of India.

Farhan, played by Madhavan, narrates the story. He occupies more screen space in the movie than Aamir. He narrates the story with such a genuine admiration for Rancho, the genius. He is a typical middle class kid whose passion to become wild life photographer was tarnished by parental pressure to take up engineering. He takes cues from Rancho and finally succeeds to convince his parents to go where his heart leads him to. More than Aamir he looked little over age for playing role of student.

Raju, the third idiot, continued from where he left in Rang De Basanti. Raju is a typical poor student overwhelmed by expectations from his family to shoulder burdens. He is a typical student whose fear of failure lets him down in exams. Unable to cope up with pressure from Dean, he attempts suicide. He made audience laugh and for a change he make them cry as well.

Pia, girl friend of Rancho, is played by Kareena. She added some commercial element to the film. A typical girl who is engaged to a successful but money minded Engineer-MBA. She once breaks her engagement and then elopes before her marriage for Rancho.

Virus is the dean of college, with punch line “Life is a race”. He represents current education system which puts enormous pressure on students. He is shown responsible for two suicides (including his own son’s) and one suicide attempt. Represents attitude of a parent who thinks Engineer or Doctor are only successful professions on earth. Rancho continuous takes a dig at him for the faults of his thinking. He finally ends up giving Rancho the honor of being the best student ever from the institute.

Chatur, the opposite of Rancho, challenges him on success. He provided some humor in the story, most of it little vulgar in taste. He loses to Rancho in college by coming second. He runs after success to compete with Rancho and ends up chasing Rancho only for his patent.

Narration:
Narration is “all is well”. At times during second there is some place where search was a dragged a bit but over all I can say “all is well”. Except the ragging scenes some vulgar words not very well suited for family audience, movie is all is well.

Director did well presenting the melo drama. He is by and large successful in translating the message into a movie that is good to watch. Some scenes like child kicking when the phrase “all is well” is uttered etc., don’t look very realistic but little funny.

Over all 3 Idiots is a must watch movie. I do not know if it can break records created by earlier movies etc., but I can surely assure it will leave you a feeling of watching another Dil Chahta hai or Rang De Basanti or Lage Raho Munnabhai.