‘Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge’ is Overrated. Here’s Why.

‘Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge’, popularly referred to as ‘DDLJ’, is, perhaps, the National romantic movie of India. I mean our grandfathers swore by ‘Mughal-e-Azam’ in their good days and our fathers by, say, ‘Aradhana’ with Rajesh Khanna singing in a Jeep moving along a mountain road. We swear by ‘DDLJ’, a much-needed acronym for a movie from the decade famous for its long movie titles. I have ‘experienced’ the movie twice in my short life. Once as a kid from the 90s and once as an adult, horrified by the way the movie gave Shah Rukh Khan a license to act in films with their own twisted and ridiculous notions about love and romance.

I have to admit that I like the film still and it would be improper to say that the movie is ridiculous or insane. Saying so would be hurting the judgement of the audiences that have shown so much love for the movie over the years. It would be proper, however, to say that its notions are ridiculous and insane. But before exploring its bizarre notions two things need to be said.

First, the movie is overrated. And Shah Rukh Khan is not be blamed, ignorantly, for that. He acted and acted well in a movie that was offered to him at a point in his career when he was happy doing Anti-hero roles in movies like ‘Darr’, ‘Anjaam’ and ‘Baazigar’. I believe that a lot of undeserved praise is heaped on ‘DDLJ’ while films like ‘Dil Se’, from the same artist, have been underrated. And it is the audiences’ perception that needs to blamed, if at all we choose to blame anyone. As far as the artists of the movies are considered they are to be praised at all costs because while they were working on both kinds of movies, they had no idea what the future held for them. It could be a fact that Shah Rukh Khan is as surprised as me at the fact that ‘DDLJ’ has made it so far. It is still running in Maratha Mandir, a cinema hall in Mumbai suburbs, while some of his far better works have been ‘arthouse-esque’ relics, which serve his critics well when they feel like panning ‘DDLJ’.

Second, the movie’s success has a lot to do with the music of the film than its lead pair’s acting skills or the direction and screenplay. I give a huge credit of its success to Jatin-Lalit, Kumar Sanu, Udit Narayan and Lata Mangeshkar. When I watched the movie as a kid, I liked the movie locales and the songs of the movie. Raj (Shah Rukh Khan), wearing a Harley Davidson Jacket, with Simran (Kajol) in his arms in a beautiful mustard field to the tunes of ‘Tujhe Dekha Toh Yeh Jaana Sanam’. I was awestruck with the European locations, the songs and the colorful clothes of the actors, the wedding scenes. I was a kid back then and had no idea about how screenplay works in movies. I did not suffer much because ‘DDLJ’ didn’t have much of both. When I grew up and watched it again, I had mixed feelings. I had a ‘feel good’ feeling after hearing those classic songs as well as the locales and a little bit situational comedy. But at the same time, I could clearly see that why despite the acting as well as writing having notable flaws, ‘DDLJ’ is not only a hit but enjoys massive cult following.

The ‘feel good’ feeling.

I do not understand to this day that what filmmakers like Aditya Chopra mean when they bring India into their movie theme. Are they filmmakers or salesmen? It is okay if Ashutosh Gowariker brings India into a film like ‘Swades’ because he means something, a change in people’s perspective. But ‘DDLJ’ seems to me like a product sold under the garb of patriotism to Indians and, significantly, Non-Residents (NRIs) to just appeal to more crowds than the film could attract otherwise. And the justifications which the film provides for its ‘Indian-ness’ are laughable, at best.

Let me elaborate a little. What exactly are Raj’s father Dharamvir Malhotra (Anupam Kher) and Simran’s father Baldev Singh Chaudhary (Amrish Puri) doing in London? Well, Dharamvir Malhotra is a millionaire businessman (apparently a high-school dropout) and Baldev Singh is a shop-owner. Both of them are making money. But we hear them rambling almost a hundred times about the greatness of India, the greatness of its soil and its rivers. And not just them, almost every other actor, Raj and Simran especially, are blabbering some vague notions about ‘Indian-ness’. I say that why leave India if one loves it so much. It is clear that both of them left it to make more money, an unlikely proposition in India.

Raj and his father drink expensive champagne on his failing to pass the University exams. They playfully dismiss people who study hard and enjoy the wealth they have made in London. But to marry off his son, Malhotra wants an Indian bride. Thames seems a distant second to Ganges for him but he has lived in his mansion in London, a city by the Thames, his entire life. Raj apparently has seen a lot of women, is a drunkard, even cheats on a shopkeeper to buy beer, but does not touch a drunk Simran to prove his ‘Indian-ness’. He could have done better. ‘India-ness’ has a lot more to it than what Raj thinks. Baldev has a family in London but does not take well to the western culture. He wants to preserve his culture by deporting his daughter forcibly to India to marry her off to his friend’s son, whom she has never even met once. He calls it an Indian tradition. It is hypocrisy, by the way, for the lack of a better word.

Despite these twisted perspectives, these people wear ‘Indian-ness’ as a badge on their sleeves. Enjoying their lives in a different country and trying to justify their hypocrisy by labelling every ridiculous thing they do as ‘Indian’. As I said, it is a good way to strike a chord with the NRI audience as well as residents by fondling with their insane notions about ‘Indian-ness’.

Creepy is the new cool, since 1995

We all have blown whistles when Raj lets out his hand to Simran to help her board the train. But what happens next is not something worth whistling. How does one behave with a woman one just met? By flashing her bra in front of her and then practically wriggling into her. Raj almost has his head in Simran’s lap when her friend comes to her rescue. How cool is that? People might call it the way ‘it’ happens but clearly Raj sure proves that he is an ‘Indian’ by doing that. I would expect a better Raj had DDLJ been made with just a little more thought.

Love is blind and ‘stupid’ too

I sometimes wonder what the scriptwriter had in mind when he was writing the movie. Raj nags Simran for marrying a man whom she has barely met. It is completely understandable. It is quite obvious, from the way he nags her, that he is attracted to her. What puzzles me here is that how has he fallen in ‘love’ with a stranger he met a few days before and has spent one or two days with. That is basically the same thing he has been nagging about to Simran. Raj is no better than her father’s choice. Additionally, he is a proven pervert. And the way Simran responds by turning back when Raj expects her to, is equally psychic. How love happens in this movie, is as messed up as its other parts.

On top of that, Raj’s psychic instincts do not just go away like that. When he decides to go back to see Simran and tell her about his love, he finds that she has left for India. It is interesting to see how he finds that Simran loves him back too. He finds a bell hanging outside her house, the one he had given her when they had parted after their holiday. He takes it as a symbol of her love.

Really! I mean she could have left it just outside her house thinking it was useless to take back to India. How intelligent of Raj to fly back all his way to India just because he found a bell outside her house. It is no wonder that the audiences choose to ignore all of it. Because they have the ‘feel-good’ feeling.

The Convenient Ending

The climax of the movie is too much dramatic when Simran’s father lets her go with Raj on the train. But I do not get the hang of it. This is because what they both leave behind is equally messy as their supposed ‘Happily ever after’ lives would be. Let us think about Kuljeet (Parmeet Sethi). A happy man about to be married. Everyone in his family is excited, all his relatives have come to attend his wedding. Enter Raj, his friend whom he has brought home. Only to realize later that the same man betrays him and runs away with his bride. He ends up beaten, dejected and humiliated.

Baldev, a man of Indian values who has come to India to marry his daughter off only to let her run away with a stranger who had earlier lied to him to buy beer from his store in London. Preeti (Mandira Bedi), who, though mistaken, likes Raj and finds herself cheated not because Raj does not like her back but because he was an imposter looking to grind his own axe. The list goes on. Not even a convincing end to the story.

Final Word

The movie lacks realism and is notional in its conceptualization of everything: love and India, for example. The reason for its immense popularity is perhaps its music and its ‘lack of realism.’ An average cine-goer goes into the cinema hall with an expectation to watch something over-the-top and not something realistic. Realism is perhaps sought by the intelligentsia who have the time and resources to debate over movies. The common man, perhaps, wants a relief from his already sad ‘realistic’ life, he doesn’t want the same life depicted on the celluloid screen. He wants some magic. ‘DDLJ’ does that and more. It gives him the ‘feel good’ feeling.

Originally published on thecinemaholic.com on 6th October, 2017.

Midnight in Paris [2011] Review: A Theme Park Ride into Nostalgia and Paris

Can you picture how drop-dead gorgeous this city is in the rain? Every city has its own character, at least in Woody Allen’s films. There are countless times when we hear that a good story must hold itself on its own, it doesn’t really matter where it takes place. That is certainly untrue if the city happens to be Paris. ‘Midnight in Paris’ is Woody Allen’s attempt at dealing with everything that is either Parisian or else something that has come to be associated with himself.

New York has been a city that Allen has portrayed a lot in his work. His best works, Annie Hall and Manhattan have a lot of the city itself in them. The hustle-bustle, loneliness, dysfunctional relationships, and the idea of a city busy with itself creep in effortlessly into these films. Midnight in Paris could well be a French arthouse film. It has a lot of elements associated with the ‘cerebral French filmmaker’. It could find itself being discussed in intellectual circles: men with receding hairlines, dark suits, thick-rimmed acetate glasses, cigarettes, and coffee, debating on its relevance. But what pulls the film out of a select audience and a monotonous commentary is Allen’s narrative and direction.

Midnight in Paris is about a couple vacationing in Paris. Gill Pender (Owen Wilson) is a jaded yet successful Hollywood screenwriter who is trying to write his first novel. His fiancée Inez (Rachel McAdams) is the daughter of a rich businessman and wants to live a luxurious and materialistic life in Malibu. Gill is a completely different person, though. A romantic at heart, he wants to settle down in Paris and write real literature instead of writing forgettable scripts to earn a fat paycheque in Hollywood. He has also fallen prey to what is referred to as the ‘Golden Age thinking’. The idea that the era that has gone by is far better than the times one lives in. Further down the story, he actually gets to time travel to the age he thinks is the golden age: Paris of the 1920s. He meets literally everyone from that era: Hemingway, the Fitzgeralds, Picasso, Matisse, Dali, and so on. He finds love in Adriana (Marion Cotillard), who is also prey to his thinking. For her, the best era is the Belle Époque.

The movie starts with a 3 ½ minute montage of Paris with Cole Porter’s ‘Let’s Do It’ in the background. It is easy to see that Paris is indeed a place that attracts dreamers and romantics. The cinematography of the movie is especially brilliant. The way the city is portrayed in warmer colors in all its glory makes it highly palatable. The lights that shine on cobwebbed buildings, the orange glow on the Seine, the ambiance of the 20s Paris draw even the driest viewers into the romantic daydream.

The movie explores a variety of themes: romance, existentialism, modernism, nostalgia. But essentially it is about a man trying to come to terms with a conflict he has been carrying on for a while. The conflict is a celebrated debate, though. Whether what has passed is the golden age or the one we live in? And whether an existential and materialistic life is happier than a fulfilled life following one’s true calling?

Gill finds himself conflicted not just in terms of life choices he must make but also in the love of three women. His current fiancé, Inez, a representative of his current existential life, materialistic and morose. Adriana, his passionate dreamy love from the era he longs to visit, Paris of the 20s. And then there is Gabrielle (Léa Seydoux), a fresh respite from the morose existence and the delusional past, who welcomes his idea of staying in Paris and its beauty in the rain.

The movie is not free from the clichés that have come to be associated with Woody Allen as a writer and filmmaker. He has survived for far more than his fair share of making films relevant to the times. The fact that some still manage to move audiences speaks volumes about his vision. Gill is the non-conformist protagonist who doesn’t really fit into the scheme of things as it were. Ernest Hemmingway is the feisty man who equates the absence of fear to making true love to a woman. Salvador Dali is a surrealist who would rather focus on his baritone than the problem at hand. There is humor in the chaos, soft sarcasm in difficult situations. As usual, the end is open for a new beginning, only one believes that it isn’t too late.

Midnight in Paris is a giant merry-go-round in the theme park that happens to be Paris. Everyone can take a ride, though everyone won’t be equally impressed. Allen’s ability to infuse pertinent themes of existence and nostalgia into a narrative around Paris and its history of art is certainly praiseworthy. The present in the film is a bit problematic, yet the glorious past fuses well with the narrative. This is certainly not the best offering from him, his best has long been in the past. But Midnight in Paris is a worthy contender if we consider his recent work.

Originally published on www.highonfilms.com on 11th June, 2020.

The craft of Kanan Gill and his new Netflix special, 'Yours Sincerely'

Straight away, Kanan Gill is in my opinion the most interesting comedian in the Indian Stand-up comedy scene. Weirdly enough, the only other comedian which piqued my interest as much was Eddie Murphy who was a rage in the U.S. back in the 1980s. That says a lot about how much my opinion is completely biased, or rather how much comedy I have actually seen. That’s a start.

Indian Stand-up scene has come of age finally. Ten years ago, there was barely anyone doing it. YouTube was just starting. Now, the comedians are everywhere. YouTube is full of fresh content, a dozen or so artists have specials streaming on platforms like Amazon or Netflix. And this is where it gets to me, what should I watch and what I should just skip. The flood of content even in comedy, is exhausting.

Comedy, as I see it, is intelligent observation but with a catch. The observation should be relatable but not too relatable to the audience. A hint of alienation is necessary to sustain interest. And that is why the flood of content exhausts me. Mediocre jokes about the average Indian and his surroundings just bore me. Too obvious. Indian-Americans talking about their unique yet frustrating lives growing up in the U.S. are not relatable at all. A la Shashi Tharoor comedian pandering to foreign audiences by introducing them to the oddities (read cliched criticisms) of India makes me shake my head in despair.

And that is why I look forward to more content by someone like Kanan Gill. His Stand-up is mostly in English which narrows his audience a bit. His content also has a mild cerebral touch to it, he talks about Pavlovian Dogs, Julius Caesar and Pretentious Hindi movies. That again narrows it a little bit more. Gill himself admitted that a comedian’s loyalists might keep on shrinking with time if he sticks to his core, in a podcast with fellow comedian Kenneth Sebastian. Yet, he is the most popular name in India today. His shows in India are instantly sold out and he tours the world as well.

Gill started his comedy career doing a YouTube segment called 'Pretentious Movie Reviews'. He along with Biswa Kalyan Rath, another popular comedian, humorously critiqued some of our much loved Hindi movies. Stand-up comedy was next in the order. What is always interesting is that his humor is razor sharp and his content is quite diverse. Newer jokes which are relatable yet funny.

‘Yours Sincerely’ is his latest show on Netflix. It is themed on a letter he wrote as a 15-year-old to his present self. The show bounces back and forth from his current life to his past as a 15-year-old. And that is where it gets funny but like a slow burn. Everyone quite relates to his past and this where he humorously talks about harsh realities of growing up.

Kanan Gill, Yours Sincerely/ Netflix

The show packs in punches on almost everything, millennial habits, Indian aunties, silent airports and unrealistic expectations about growing up. Gill has a put a lot of himself in the show quite obviously. The bits about ‘If Possible’ when talking about love and ‘You Lose’ being a general judging statement rather than a game line get sad laughs. Sarcastic detours into Julius Caesar, writing letters in school and students being confused about metaphors suggest an ICSE school which hasn’t really changed in all these years. Sanskrit phrases draw people to their own memories of mugging them up.

The show has its hits and misses, mostly hits. It is an affectionate pat on the backs of people nearing their 30s, yet nowhere close to the lives they imagined 15 years ago. The humor is gentle and makes people wonder about the things they have forgotten themselves. There is a line in the show somewhere. “Is there anything lamer than how you used to be? Remember previous versions of your personality?” It is a good line.

Strange Days

The Corona pandemic has turned into something like the Football World Cup. The comparison is really crude, yes. But isn’t everyone behaving like a future pundit just like football pundits during the Cup? It is very privileged yet smug of me to write something from the comforts of the home, while thousands keep dying in my country and the world. The class difference as well the stars’ difference couldn’t be starker than what it is now. I am both privileged and lucky. Unlike millions.

Every Mumbaikar has at least once wished that Mumbai were this peaceful. Careful what you wish for, they said. Image by Indian Express.

Everyone is both worried and predictive about what the pandemic might actually turn into. As of now, it is turning into a giant monster just getting bigger and bigger every day. The toll of deaths is increasing each day supplemented in equal measure by conspiracy theories. China, they say, leaked the virus from a lab in Wuhan. Well, if there is an iota of truth in this rumor, then it is the dawn of a new era. The era of biological war. And since U.S. has been hit the worst, it fits into the scheme of things. China and U.S. were embroiled in an intense trade war for over a year or two, thanks to Mr. Trump’s imprudent protectionist policies.

It sometimes sends me into a thinking spree as to the current fate of the daily wage laborer in a country like India. With the poorest social security, thanks to humongous corruption even in these times, he is doomed. He has to actually see his family die slowly because there is simply no work outside. No medical facilities, no shelter, some are trapped in alien cities left to their own fate. Then there are layoffs in the corporate sector and more will follow. Meanwhile, Police and Administration are working day and night even at the risk of catching the virus. The only silent heroes.

I don’t think that the mere eradication or containment of the virus will serve any purpose. Sure, things will at least start rolling. But it will take a long time to really cope up with the losses the world will see. And this world is globalized. Every part of the body will share the pain. The industry, particularly energy, transport, manufacturing et al will have a real hard time and governments would have to reluctantly pump in money. The borrowings and the subsequent vices might turn Corona into an economic crisis as well. The monster has its body deep in the ocean.

Also, once it is all done, we selfish people will return to every bad habit which got exposed during the episode. I still can’t believe people burnt crackers at the behest of the PM to light diyas instead. SSI-Seriously Stupid Indians, that is what they are. Isn’t it more obvious, that our own misdeeds have led to this catastrophe? Overpopulation, lack of civic sense, pollution, waste dumps? I just dread at the thought that what if India had been as deeply infected as the U.S. Given our serious population and no considerable measures or infrastructure of containment, would we have survived even a month? Yamuna is cleaner after the lockdown than it ever was. And yes, millions were spent to clean Yamuna with poorest results. So, it is true? That the enemies of nature are indeed humans.

What will India do to better face such situations once it is done? I am not quite sure. Everyone will go back to the old ways after celebrating. And then we will go on, waiting for the next catastrophe to strike. We might need a new scapegoat, though. Because China won’t serve us long. Look at how well they did. By the way, the strange resurgence of the Ramayana and Mahabharata on television these days still puzzles me. Is is just a way to calm the nerves with some divine presence? Wait. Don’t tell me. No. Do we hypocrites believe deep down that the Gods might help? I don’t think so. They left this place long ago.

Rest in Peace, Shashi Kapoor.

Shashi Kapoor passed away yesterday. I came to know about it through a humorous incident where people were ringing up 'Shashi Tharoor's' place instead of  'Shashi Kapoor's' to pay condolences. One can only wish peace to the departed soul whose life was marked by a career full of outstanding performances.

I have always been the kind of person who is against any form of star-worship. I have found it quite juvenile as well as misplaced to do so simply because our film and sportsmen make a lot of money out of what they do. They lead lavish lives and perhaps there is no difference between them and a stranger businessman one meets across the street apart from the fact that their work is quite there in the public domain. The only ones who deserve fandom, if at all, are our beloved leaders and social workers, quite rare in these days, who have worked tirelessly for our well being. And we have been quite lazy to even show an ounce of respect for our national idols while we can wait for hours to get a glimpse of our favourite star.

But Shashi is one of those exceptions which all of us make to our own beliefs. He was one those rare actors whose presence in a movie exalted me into a blissful ecstasy. Easily one of the most handsome men ever to grace our screens, my personal favourite is Shammi Kapoor though, his smile, his demeanour, his accent, his dialogues- all have made my childhood a happy experience.

Connecting with him as a 90s kid was quite easier than his elder siblings, Raj and Shammi. Raj's films, although spectacular, didn't relate much with me as a kid since their subject and treatment was quite 'Nehruvian' and 'Chaplin-esque'. Although it is a treat to watch Raj Kapoor's cinema as a mature adult, a child was not fascinated by it back in the 90s. Same goes for Shammi. His whole song and dance stardom was quite eccentric for me to digest.

But Shashi Kapoor was quite a relatable star. For one, he was versatile. He had played lead romantic roles in movies but at the same time he had done decent action in movies too. He had worked in prominent international films mostly by Merchant Ivory House and at the same time he had worked in art and offbeat films like 'Ijaazat' and 'New Delhi Times' too. His most memorable moments, as I remember watching as a kid, were those 'masala movies' where he would dance to catchy songs wearing colourful clothes, do some action, romance a bit and so on.

'Deewar' is a special film of his which I have watched as kid. Amitabh Bachchan's role as 'Vijay' was quite larger than life which suited him well. But I was equally impressed by the understated yet persistent role of Shashi as 'Ravi'- an honest cop standing against his own criminal brother.

His repertoire of movies is quite huge and I guess I might have missed out on many of them, especially his international collaborations. He was the only mainstream star of his times who was involved in such films.

He might not be alive today but he certainly leaves behind a great deal of good work behind for forthcoming generations to enjoy. As for me, I think he was one of those actors who saw light of the day in an era of Indian Cinema when content and artistic vision still had their share in films.

R.I.P.
Shashi Kapoor (1938-2017)

Things we are doing wrong collectively.

Undeserved attention, rewards, adulation to P.V. Sindhu

1. I need not talk about her achievements in sports. They are illustrious and phenomenal. But I fail to understand that what on this earth qualifies her for the post of Deputy Collector for which many poor, rich, disabled, backward etc students burn their midnight oil for ?

Source

Maybe the Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh Shri Chandrababu Naidu thinks she has a badminton shot ready to tackle all of it.

Pity ! And I thought that I was the only one who thinks that these students were stupid to just toil for years first preparing for the exam and then in the Training Institute.

Anyway her attendance in the Collector’s office would be much like that of Lord Tendulkar’s in Rajya Sabha.

I wonder why Tendulkar and Sindhu took up these jobs knowing well that they won’t be able to do justice to them. They should be aware that their salaries and allowances come from the valuable money of tax payers. They should have also known that some very deserving candidates in their place could have done much better jobs. Anyway they had had lucrative careers.

But who doesn’t want a free ride in India ? Hats off Tendulkar and Sindhu !

Well Played !

I don’t blame Shri Chandrababu Naidu for offering her a lot of money (I will talk about this later) and that post to her.

After all in the next elections he would have something to claim.

“ Please vote for us. If you do, we will ensure that nothing good becomes of the common man. But yes we will continue to seek acclaim by offering important government posts to useless people who have no idea how to go about them, just like us.”

It is unbelievable that the leaders of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh even went to the extent of fighting over the fact that whether Sindhu belonged to Telangana or Andhra Pradesh.

Such “Honourable Buffoons”.

I wonder where were they and their stashes of cash when Sindhu’s coach Pulela Gopichand had to mortgage his house to be able to finance a training academy for Badminton.

2. Rewards for winning the silver medal at the 2016 Rio Summer Olympics

₹5 crore (US$780,000), and a land grant  from the Government of  Telangana.

₹30 lakh (US$47,000) from the Indian Olympic Association.

₹1.01 lakh (US$1,600) from Salman Khan, for qualifying as an Olympic participant.

₹3 crore (US$470,000), a Group A cadre job(Deputy Collector of Andhra Pradesh) and 1000 square yd land grant from the Government of Andhra Pradesh.

₹2 crore (US$310,000) from the Government of Delhi.

₹75 lakh (US$120,000) from her employer, Bharat Petroleum Corporation, with promotion from assistant to deputy sports manager.

₹50 lakh (US$78,000) from the Government of Haryana.

₹50 lakh (US$78,000) from the Government of Madhya Pradesh.

₹50 lakh (US$78,000) from the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports.

₹50 lakh (US$78,000) from Badminton Association of India.

₹50 lakh (US$78,000) from NRI businessman, Mukkattu Sebastian.

₹5 lakh (US$7,800) from All India Football Federation.

BMW car from the Hyderabad District Badminton Association and as well as Indian cricketer Sachin Tendulkar.

Miniature badminton racquet memento with gold and diamond from Kirtilals.

Source

I wonder why such hefty amounts of money have been showered on a sportsperson whose only achievements have been winning some medals at international level.

I am sure that playing and winning matches at international level require the highest levels of sportsmanship and talent. Sindhu has worked very hard.

But so does a labourer who works all day and is still not able to meet his ends.

In a country as poor and underdeveloped as India how can we afford to waste so much money just to glorify the leaders who award them ?

And mind the fact that these awards are in excess of the legitimate Remuneration, Allowances, National Awards and so on.

And apart from platonic returns that Sindhu brings in by winning matches what service is she doing for the nation or for that matter any sportsperson in India ?

The sad truth is that they contribute nothing majorly. The sponsors that they bring in pay a hefty fees to the government but God knows where that revenue goes. And that is also true about only Cricket. The kind of money that is involved has led to widespread corruption in BCCI and to scams like that of Commonwealth Games 2010.

3. One thing which is very sad is the dismal performance of India in every sport except Cricket. Just look at the performance in Olympics. It would be better that we do not send in any team there at all. Because we won’t win medals anyway. A major cause for this is the lack of infrastructure to train athletes.

An interesting observation in this regard is that the lack of training infrastructure is not due to the lack of money. This is so because the kind of monetary rewards Sindhu received after winning the Silver Medal are enough to fund some quality infrastructure to train athletes at the national level.

But Politicians don’t care. Why would they ?

Sadly even Sindhu does not care. Despite having a platform to speak up and bringing this issue to light, Sindhu decides to take the rewards, a free bureaucratic Job and keep mum.

Why should she worry ?

Perhaps I expect too much from her. Before asking her I should pay heed to the fact that even I have done nothing for the welfare of the nation. Even I have taken free rides when I got the chance.

I am not a National Icon.

But so is P.V. Sindhu.

She is a mere Badminton Player.

But we do have a National Icon.

Kailash Satyarthi

1. I am very sure that all those stupid Tendulkar fans who went berserk when Maria Sharapova denied knowing him do not even now Kailash Satyarthi. Although his contribution for this nation’s welfare is much greater than any sportsperson let alone Tendulkar, even the most sane people of India came to know about him only when he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

2. He is the person that India needs but does not deserve at all. It is a shame that his efforts were recognized by foreign enclaves like the Nobel Prize Foundation but his own country failed to recognize him.

Well, they were busy awarding Amitabh Bachchan the stupidest award only presented in countries like India : “Star of the Millenium”. Either this or may be they were making John Travolta dance to the tunes of “Lungi Dance” at IIFA awards.

3. Satyarthi is involved with a major movement called “Bachpan Bachao Aandolan” credited with saving the lives of almost 83,000 children from bonded labour.

4. I am very sure that he might never get awarded the Bharat Ratna which he deserves more than anyone else around. Because I am very sure that Bonded Labour is not as glamorous as Cricket or Film or Music.

This guy has no fans.

Sad.

Pathetic.

EDIT 1:

1. I would like to point out that I do not believe in name calling to prove my point. I also do not believe in blaming others for not being righteous enough. It is their call just like mine. But I had to take names because that was the only way to prove my point otherwise this would have been a general debate and people would have called me a lunatic. As you all may have noticed I have cited the relevant source whenever I have made a point.

2. As Jahnavi Patel pointed out, I think I should clarify myself here.

My comparison of an athlete to a labourer, though looks very awkward, is justifiable. First, both are citizens of this country. Second, lets not say that any athlete who plays for India makes it proud. Because anyone who does anything being an Indian citizen either makes India proud or disgraced.

I will explain how.

An army soldier fights for the nation at the border and gives away his life fighting for the country. He makes the nation proud. Not awarded 200 million and a deputy collector’s post to his relative.

A labourer works hard all day. Earns his living. Contributes to the GDP. Acts as a backbone to the manufacturing sector. Meagre income. No access to healthcare and education. Still survives. Makes India proud. No 200 million and a Deputy Collector’s post.

A Physicist in India works hard and researches to make inventions and discoveries despite the poor infrastructure as well as poorly paid reserach fellowships. Makes India proud. No 200 million and a deputy collector’s post.

An Economist works on theories related to economic development, poverty alleviation, welfare etc. Helps in real growth of the country. Poor salaries and allowances.  Makes India proud. No 200 million and a deputy collector’s post.

An important point here to note is that I have mentioned ‘Deputy Collector’s post’ liberally throughout. Its usage is arbitrary. I mean what would a Physicist do with a Collector’s job. Here I mean to say that in return for his services he is given employment in a sphere where his expertise does not lie. For example, a Physicist is given the job of the Chief Security Advisor of the country by the government as a favour for his research in a completely different area.

The reason employed behind all these weaknesses of the system.

“India is a poor country, with a population of 1.35 billion.”

Boom comes the sportsman.

Works hard. wins a medal. national awards. land. job. car. 200 million. still counting…

How much reward did Pulela Gopichand receive who mortgaged his house to train sindhu ?

How much reward did Amartya Sen receive when he won the nobel prize for economics?

How much reward did Kailash Satyarthi receive when he won the nobel peace prize ?

A Nobel prize is equal to, if not greater than, an Olympics medal in terms of prestige and honour at “international level”.

A Bharat Ratna for liberating 83,000 children from bonded labour is equally desrved, if not more than, a Bharat Ratna for playing cricket while earning billions.

Do not compare Physicists, Economists  with Sportsmen. It is an insult to some of the noblest professions.

3. Naresh Jilla Do you check the news website when you plan to select the college you have to attend ? Or the hospital where you would take your grandmother to for her arthiritis ? Or which tourist spot you would like to visit next summer ? No. You find out yourself.

Do not blame media for not reporting an issue with greater coverage. What can they do ? When the only information Indians want is “Who is Virat Kohli’s next girlfriend ?”. Sorry Kohli. Had to say that.

4. I do not underestimate the importance of sports and its relative impact on the well being of people. But those 200 million could have helped set up a good Training Academy for athletes. We could have had many winners. There is a lot of talent going wasted due to utter lack of reverence and corruption and irresponsibility.

EDIT 2

1. Here is something good Manjinder Singh Swann has to say:

“In my opinion rather than giving her crores of Rs. government should have invested that money for the next Olympic preparations so that our athletes can perform better. Only few lakhs are enough for these athletes because after winning a medal at an event like Olympics these athletes already grab the attention of big brands which offer them advertisement contracts from which they can earn crores of Rs. 

On one hand some athletes don’t even have money to pay for the air tickets to attend Olympic, or to get a medical fitness certificate, or to prepare for the event, and on the other hand some athletes gets crores of Rs. just for winning Silver medal. 

Who knows if some of the athletes who don’t have money to prepare or who don’t have coach like Pullela can grab us a Gold medal if given a chance ?”

Originally written here.