Actors:
Ms. Twitty - Twisted mind female
Mr. Flummoxed - lets just call him another poor victim
Setting: The office lunch room
Mr. Flummoxed swaggers in to Ms. Twitty's table.
Mr. Flummoxed: Guys have you ever tried beer and grapes, it is a deadly combo.
Ms. Twitty (deadpan expression): Have you ever tried sex and marie biscuits?
Mr. Flummoxed: ......
Scene fades with Mr. Flummoxed still trying to get the concotion right in his mind.
Thursday, March 27, 2008
The strange world of Ms. Twitty - Episode 1: Sex Appeal
Actors:
Mr. Victim – 30 year old virgin male
Ms. Twitty – Twisted mind female
Setting: office lunch room. Mr. Victim and Ms. Twitty having a conversation.
Ms. Twitty: Why have not shaved today?
Mr. Victim (touching his stubble in a macho manner): This is my sex appeal.
Ms. Twitty: Sex Appeal? YOU better appeal to court for some sex.
Mr. Victim: ……
Scene fades with Mr. Victim eating food quietly and probably still thinking how to draw some blood.
Mr. Victim – 30 year old virgin male
Ms. Twitty – Twisted mind female
Setting: office lunch room. Mr. Victim and Ms. Twitty having a conversation.
Ms. Twitty: Why have not shaved today?
Mr. Victim (touching his stubble in a macho manner): This is my sex appeal.
Ms. Twitty: Sex Appeal? YOU better appeal to court for some sex.
Mr. Victim: ……
Scene fades with Mr. Victim eating food quietly and probably still thinking how to draw some blood.
Not for today post and there is no tomorrow
Enamored by now.
A society as it progresses gets more and more self engrossed with the present. And the same gets inflected in the individual. Only the immediate realities get any attention from us.
Our choices bring forth this uncomfortable truth - choices from the inane to less inane. It is uncomfortable to look or think about the future. Art, culture, literature become victims of our existentialist thinking and living.
Everything gets compromised. Look at our cinema of today, we create escapist worlds or reflective cinema - Inane humor or dark realities. Unquestioning, unthinking worlds or sinister inner realms. Those 24 frames per second illusions are about us and are us. We root for the evil, brooding psychopath and not for the conscientious cop. The old villain is the new hero.
Literature is boring. We have no time to waste time on these fictional narratives. We would rather spend time reading the biography of the Richard Branson than peek into tormented soul of Edgar Allen Poe. We relish the one liners of Oscar Wilde while his foreboding warning of a egocentric, narcissist world catches dust in a corner. We would never see any correlation or debate about the George Orwell’s ominous Big Brother and the www.
Silliness , stupidity and ridiculousness of our discussions.
Imagine Paris Hilton is a celebrity while we have no idea who is our Vice President. We would know the names of our favorite actors dog or grandchildren or have an opinion about their choice of clothes but would have no talk about the Nandigram or Nihari Killings except the unmeant, insincere tutt tutt. Go tutt tutt yourself.
Have you ever wondered how economic disparity impacts your life?
Think why you are scared of the guards who guard your house? Or why you clutch your purse a little tighter when you see under-privileged? Or where the rampant consumerism is taking us?
Ever in passing has it ever crossed your mind, how hollow your life is? Or why moving from one mall to another is entertainment or probably your only hobby today?
Future is invented today and today we have no future.
We are today petty minds, with petty needs and pitiable lives.
Probably this was not the place you wanted to be for your daily high. Thank for reading and forgetting is faster than you read.
Goodbye and good luck.
A society as it progresses gets more and more self engrossed with the present. And the same gets inflected in the individual. Only the immediate realities get any attention from us.
Our choices bring forth this uncomfortable truth - choices from the inane to less inane. It is uncomfortable to look or think about the future. Art, culture, literature become victims of our existentialist thinking and living.
Everything gets compromised. Look at our cinema of today, we create escapist worlds or reflective cinema - Inane humor or dark realities. Unquestioning, unthinking worlds or sinister inner realms. Those 24 frames per second illusions are about us and are us. We root for the evil, brooding psychopath and not for the conscientious cop. The old villain is the new hero.
Literature is boring. We have no time to waste time on these fictional narratives. We would rather spend time reading the biography of the Richard Branson than peek into tormented soul of Edgar Allen Poe. We relish the one liners of Oscar Wilde while his foreboding warning of a egocentric, narcissist world catches dust in a corner. We would never see any correlation or debate about the George Orwell’s ominous Big Brother and the www.
Silliness , stupidity and ridiculousness of our discussions.
Imagine Paris Hilton is a celebrity while we have no idea who is our Vice President. We would know the names of our favorite actors dog or grandchildren or have an opinion about their choice of clothes but would have no talk about the Nandigram or Nihari Killings except the unmeant, insincere tutt tutt. Go tutt tutt yourself.
Have you ever wondered how economic disparity impacts your life?
Think why you are scared of the guards who guard your house? Or why you clutch your purse a little tighter when you see under-privileged? Or where the rampant consumerism is taking us?
Ever in passing has it ever crossed your mind, how hollow your life is? Or why moving from one mall to another is entertainment or probably your only hobby today?
Future is invented today and today we have no future.
We are today petty minds, with petty needs and pitiable lives.
Probably this was not the place you wanted to be for your daily high. Thank for reading and forgetting is faster than you read.
Goodbye and good luck.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Why not?
Fathers and sons.
They have their small talk, healthy discussions, heated arguments but do they really ever have a conversation?
They have their small talk, healthy discussions, heated arguments but do they really ever have a conversation?
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Teach to contribute
It is sometimes amazing to think how our education system is skewed towards mediocrity. And when you look around it is so tragic to find we as people are so oblivious to this glaring fact.
This mediocrity which gets ingrained in our way of thinking from the cradle then cascades and permeates every facet of our life – work, thinking, living.
The question is where does this mediocrity stem from?
The mediocrity stems from the role educators give to the reason for education. The primary stress any institution delves on is “success”. We are trained to succeed.
And how do you succeed?
Simple, beat the average.
It doesn’t matter whether you beat the mean by 0.1 or by 49.9 as long as you are above the average you succeed.
It regresses our mental approach to survival and not evolution.
"Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will die. Every morning in Africa, a lion wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle; when the sun comes up, you'd better be running."
If you have attended any business school this is the first adage you hear and are taught.
This is the current spectrum.
Imagine another spectrum where the focus is not on succeeding but on contributing.
Contribute.
It doesn’t matter which field you choose, what subject you study, what profession you pick, a child is taught to contribute.
Envisage a scenario where the teacher tells his class your chosen field today stands here, can you push it further? Improve not manage.
It no longer is about the capability of your peers, it is challenge to you?
Individualistic.
Your potential, your capability, your courage, your mind, your body.
This way of education is with a purpose and can start at every level.
Anything you are taught are small building blocks leading towards a bigger picture.
You are not taught to remember 1, 2, 3 but the meaning of numbers.
Imagine.
The only field where this approach is applied is sports. You have landmarks, benchmarks, bars which athletes, sportsperson are constantly thriving to beat and better. The coaches remind you constantly about these goals, these legends. These legends are used as tools of inspiration for child as well as a professional sportsperson.
If it can happen in sports why won’t the same tool be applicable in education?
This mediocrity which gets ingrained in our way of thinking from the cradle then cascades and permeates every facet of our life – work, thinking, living.
The question is where does this mediocrity stem from?
The mediocrity stems from the role educators give to the reason for education. The primary stress any institution delves on is “success”. We are trained to succeed.
And how do you succeed?
Simple, beat the average.
It doesn’t matter whether you beat the mean by 0.1 or by 49.9 as long as you are above the average you succeed.
It regresses our mental approach to survival and not evolution.
"Every morning in Africa, a gazelle wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the fastest lion or it will die. Every morning in Africa, a lion wakes up. It knows it must run faster than the slowest gazelle or it will starve to death. It doesn't matter whether you are a lion or a gazelle; when the sun comes up, you'd better be running."
If you have attended any business school this is the first adage you hear and are taught.
This is the current spectrum.
Imagine another spectrum where the focus is not on succeeding but on contributing.
Contribute.
It doesn’t matter which field you choose, what subject you study, what profession you pick, a child is taught to contribute.
Envisage a scenario where the teacher tells his class your chosen field today stands here, can you push it further? Improve not manage.
It no longer is about the capability of your peers, it is challenge to you?
Individualistic.
Your potential, your capability, your courage, your mind, your body.
This way of education is with a purpose and can start at every level.
Anything you are taught are small building blocks leading towards a bigger picture.
You are not taught to remember 1, 2, 3 but the meaning of numbers.
Imagine.
The only field where this approach is applied is sports. You have landmarks, benchmarks, bars which athletes, sportsperson are constantly thriving to beat and better. The coaches remind you constantly about these goals, these legends. These legends are used as tools of inspiration for child as well as a professional sportsperson.
If it can happen in sports why won’t the same tool be applicable in education?
Twice
Some books need to be read twice.
Some stories need to be told twice.
Some lives need to be lived twice.
Some faces need to be looked at twice.
Some people need to be beaten twice.
Some chances need to be taken twice.
Some chances need to be given twice.
And some friendships need to be made twice.
Some stories need to be told twice.
Some lives need to be lived twice.
Some faces need to be looked at twice.
Some people need to be beaten twice.
Some chances need to be taken twice.
Some chances need to be given twice.
And some friendships need to be made twice.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
No Smoking
The most panned movie of last year, hated by the critics, derided by the audience (most of them at least). And I, the gullible trusting soul almost believed them.
Thank God, better sense prevailed and I actually did watch the movie.
But the reason I am writing this mail is not to sing paeans for this wonderful work of art but about something which really made me think.
There is no background to it and context will be only for those who have seen the movie.
Ranvir Shorey losing his fingers (rather forcibly cut by Baba) and Baba restoring the finger later and Ranvir accepting it like a reward.
What an analogy?
Someone took something precious from you, something that never belonged to him, and not only takes away, takes it away as if it is his right and finally returns something which was always yours and never his as a reward and you accept it with gratitude at the benevolence.
Isn’t this exactly what the state does to its citizens?
A small scene, possibly missed if you blink twice but captures the intent of the film maker so beautifully - The eternal struggle of the individual against the state.
It’s not about the cigarette it is about free will.
Thank God, better sense prevailed and I actually did watch the movie.
But the reason I am writing this mail is not to sing paeans for this wonderful work of art but about something which really made me think.
There is no background to it and context will be only for those who have seen the movie.
Ranvir Shorey losing his fingers (rather forcibly cut by Baba) and Baba restoring the finger later and Ranvir accepting it like a reward.
What an analogy?
Someone took something precious from you, something that never belonged to him, and not only takes away, takes it away as if it is his right and finally returns something which was always yours and never his as a reward and you accept it with gratitude at the benevolence.
Isn’t this exactly what the state does to its citizens?
A small scene, possibly missed if you blink twice but captures the intent of the film maker so beautifully - The eternal struggle of the individual against the state.
It’s not about the cigarette it is about free will.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Move your word
Have you ever played chess? If you have you will know what I am talking about.
It’s a beautiful addictive game. And people who play it love to play it every day, anywhere, anytime.
It is played in the mind but sometimes the mind also plays the game with the game.
If you leave the game once, for whatsoever short time, it is a very hard to start again.
Now if you would listen to me, I will share a secret - this our friend mind by nature is a lazy bugger- hates working, hates thinking – and if given a choice would rather sleep than exercise those grey cells.
So when the mind gets a chance to laze it gets practically impossible to raise it from the slumber.
Writing in that way is like playing chess, assembling your forces in the mind and then pushing your weapons forward, pushing a word here, hiding a metaphor there, tricking, weaving a perfect web where the reader will find no way of escaping your world and your logic.
So coming back to the original question, have you ever played Chess?
If you have you would now why I couldn’t write for the last so many days.
Checkmate, finally.
I win this time.
It’s a beautiful addictive game. And people who play it love to play it every day, anywhere, anytime.
It is played in the mind but sometimes the mind also plays the game with the game.
If you leave the game once, for whatsoever short time, it is a very hard to start again.
Now if you would listen to me, I will share a secret - this our friend mind by nature is a lazy bugger- hates working, hates thinking – and if given a choice would rather sleep than exercise those grey cells.
So when the mind gets a chance to laze it gets practically impossible to raise it from the slumber.
Writing in that way is like playing chess, assembling your forces in the mind and then pushing your weapons forward, pushing a word here, hiding a metaphor there, tricking, weaving a perfect web where the reader will find no way of escaping your world and your logic.
So coming back to the original question, have you ever played Chess?
If you have you would now why I couldn’t write for the last so many days.
Checkmate, finally.
I win this time.
Monday, February 11, 2008
Film(s)y Heroine
People say a man is intrigued with a woman till they have sex.
So say people not I.
But what ‘people’ say seems to find merit for the Hindi film heroine. But the sex is not literal here but metaphorical and finds its expression in what every actor dreams of achieving atleast once in their career– a role that moves the audience, makes them love you, hate you, lust you, despise you or whatever the performance requires – the moment when actor transcends the threshold which the mortals aspire and the God’s trapeze.
But unfortunately this moment of perfect union of the actress and the audience is also the most tragic one for the actress. It is the end of the love affair. The beginning of the end of the career.
If you look from the wide angle, an actress’s career traverses a particular path and as we will see would hold good for any name, irrespective of the era.
There is particular movie in which the ‘man’ (audience) ‘sees’ her for the first time (and this need not be the first movie) and falls in love. Then the chase begins wherein she teases him, promising the world but still playing elusive and one day the moment comes when sex happens. A role where she gives her all – sweat all moment –orgasmic, perfect, pure.
In that moment the enigma disappears.
In that moment the enigma disappears.
The smarter actress ensures she has a headache as long as possible and has a little more prolonged careers, than some who had it all but lost it in the heat of the moment – deceived by lust once again.
Now I get down to the brass-tacks – proving the hypothesis right.
Sridevi the seductress managed her career well but her moment of weakness was ‘chandani’. That is the role which catapulted her as the serious actress. Ideally ‘Lamhe’ should have been her moment of glory but the audience enjoyed that role but her moment of toasting was long over by then.
Rani Mukherjee after playing in the fringes for a number of years was discovered in “Chupke Chupke”, teased in her next couple of movies, her moment of glory was “bunty and bubli” and then it was curtains. You might see her around for some more years but the unadulterated adulation she received before would never be achieved again.
I can probably have multiple other examples, but you will find a similar chart everytime.
A career leading to that perfect moment, followed with a downward slope.
While male counterparts manage maybe 4-5 immortal roles, women at best manage 1. Two is an exception never a norm.
Sridevi – Chandani
Madhubala – Mughle Azzam
Madhuri Dixit - ????
Hema Malini – Sholay
Rekha – Umrao Jaan
Madhubala – Mughle Azzam
Madhuri Dixit - ????
Hema Malini – Sholay
Rekha – Umrao Jaan
One exception has been Kajol. Then when she first came to screen, she took the best possible persona that ensured her longevity – my favorite sister. So when she wore that white short short wet mini-skirt in DDLJ one was not aroused but rather disappointed. No wonder she attracts audience despite, the cardinal sin for a hindi film actress, being married.
How about the male actors?
There life is simpler - it boils down to straight hair.
Friday, February 01, 2008
Thursday, January 31, 2008
30th January
Yes we all know that Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated on that day.
But we live in busy times and details sometimes slip from our cluttered mind.
Yesterday I completely forgot about the day.
I came home from switched on the TV and saw, as expected, the news covering the story.
As I sat there watching TV, my subconscious pricked me, reminded me, goaded me, yes Mahatma Gandhi was killed on this day, but dude there is a much bigger, titanic scale tragedy which happened on this day.
I tried to clear the fog and then I remembered it was also Sudip and Anu’s wedding anniversary.
Congratulations Anu and my heartfelt sympathies are with you Sudip.
But we live in busy times and details sometimes slip from our cluttered mind.
Yesterday I completely forgot about the day.
I came home from switched on the TV and saw, as expected, the news covering the story.
As I sat there watching TV, my subconscious pricked me, reminded me, goaded me, yes Mahatma Gandhi was killed on this day, but dude there is a much bigger, titanic scale tragedy which happened on this day.
I tried to clear the fog and then I remembered it was also Sudip and Anu’s wedding anniversary.
Congratulations Anu and my heartfelt sympathies are with you Sudip.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Prince and his horse
Once upon a time, prince was riding through a deep jungle on his horse.
Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop
After a long time of galloping the horse turned to the prince and said “Prince, I am thirsty, can we take a break for water?”
They saw a stream of fresh water.
Prince rode the horse to the stream and got down so that horse could drink water.
Horse immediately trotted towards the stream and drinking water greedily…
Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp,
Prince thought while the horse is drinking water he can eat his food. He started eating his food.
Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp.
Horse came back and saw prince eating his food and he thought he should also eat his food.
Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp.
Prince finished his food and went to the stream to drink some water.
Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp
Prince and horse actually overate, so they decided to sleep for some time…
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
They woke after couple of hours and decided to start on their journey again…
Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, …………………………………………….……………..
I looked down on my angel, smiled and quietly put her in her bed.
Sweet dreams, darling.
Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop
After a long time of galloping the horse turned to the prince and said “Prince, I am thirsty, can we take a break for water?”
They saw a stream of fresh water.
Prince rode the horse to the stream and got down so that horse could drink water.
Horse immediately trotted towards the stream and drinking water greedily…
Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp,
Prince thought while the horse is drinking water he can eat his food. He started eating his food.
Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp.
Horse came back and saw prince eating his food and he thought he should also eat his food.
Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp, Chomp, chomp, chomp, chomp.
Prince finished his food and went to the stream to drink some water.
Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp, Slurp, slurp
Prince and horse actually overate, so they decided to sleep for some time…
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
They woke after couple of hours and decided to start on their journey again…
Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, Gallop, …………………………………………….……………..
I looked down on my angel, smiled and quietly put her in her bed.
Sweet dreams, darling.
Monday, January 28, 2008
Barbie Dolls
Picking up another contentious issue to discuss which has been much debated topic with my wife.
The issue that I plan to put forth is my point of view about bringing up a girl child and would very conveniently ignore the counterview expressed by my wife.
The genesis of this debate started from a general observation/comment by me that parents make a big mistake to doll up their little young daughters – Armani clothes and Gucci shoes.
You can see today little girls as young as two-three sashaying in their designer clothes with parents adoring these little models with starry eyes – my daughter prettiest.
I believe this supposedly indulgent innocuous action by parents puts a much disadvantaged female child at an even weaker position.
Such actions reinforce, propagate and establish the very stereotypes women are trying to fight at that young age itself.
A child’s mind is open to suggestions and how she will view herself will be established at that very age.
“You need to look beautiful” is the worst suggestion that a parents can give to their daughters.
I have nothing against people dressing up their kids smartly, what is an issue is the unnatural degree of emphasis on this dumb activity. This simple suggestion becomes a singular focus as they grow up.
Imagine the strength of this vicious cycle, girls as they grow up have other girls as friends who have been trained themselves to consider this as a vital life defining activity, and looking more beautiful than the peer group becomes a singular focus of achievement.
What right do women have to criticize the advertisers and marketers parading beautiful women and building typecasts when that is what they need and talk about the maximum.
Keep a hand on your heart and say this is not true.
It bleeds my heart to see young girls preening themselves in front of the mirror – wasted life, wasted opportunity.
Before the world defines their position in the society, women themselves become slaves of this image. It takes away so much of their energy, attention, focus, capability.
If you ask me it is bloody unfortunate.
Why?
We all know that men look at women as objects and if women also look themselves as objects (beauty a primary focus) that must indulge the male eye, it’s doom written all over – twice.
Before women scream from the rooftops about their rights, I believe they need to look inwards about the role they play themselves as mothers, sisters, friends, colleagues in shaping the stereotype.
Power of suggestion.
Only you can decide whether your daughter will have an ambition to be another Sushmita Sen or a Marie Curie.
p.s: before any "tare jameen par" flag bearer start taking about the tragedy of putting pressure on kids for achievement, let me clarify, this topic is not about degree of achievement (irrelevant point) but about shaping destiny.
The issue that I plan to put forth is my point of view about bringing up a girl child and would very conveniently ignore the counterview expressed by my wife.
The genesis of this debate started from a general observation/comment by me that parents make a big mistake to doll up their little young daughters – Armani clothes and Gucci shoes.
You can see today little girls as young as two-three sashaying in their designer clothes with parents adoring these little models with starry eyes – my daughter prettiest.
I believe this supposedly indulgent innocuous action by parents puts a much disadvantaged female child at an even weaker position.
Such actions reinforce, propagate and establish the very stereotypes women are trying to fight at that young age itself.
A child’s mind is open to suggestions and how she will view herself will be established at that very age.
“You need to look beautiful” is the worst suggestion that a parents can give to their daughters.
I have nothing against people dressing up their kids smartly, what is an issue is the unnatural degree of emphasis on this dumb activity. This simple suggestion becomes a singular focus as they grow up.
Imagine the strength of this vicious cycle, girls as they grow up have other girls as friends who have been trained themselves to consider this as a vital life defining activity, and looking more beautiful than the peer group becomes a singular focus of achievement.
What right do women have to criticize the advertisers and marketers parading beautiful women and building typecasts when that is what they need and talk about the maximum.
Keep a hand on your heart and say this is not true.
It bleeds my heart to see young girls preening themselves in front of the mirror – wasted life, wasted opportunity.
Before the world defines their position in the society, women themselves become slaves of this image. It takes away so much of their energy, attention, focus, capability.
If you ask me it is bloody unfortunate.
Why?
We all know that men look at women as objects and if women also look themselves as objects (beauty a primary focus) that must indulge the male eye, it’s doom written all over – twice.
Before women scream from the rooftops about their rights, I believe they need to look inwards about the role they play themselves as mothers, sisters, friends, colleagues in shaping the stereotype.
Power of suggestion.
Only you can decide whether your daughter will have an ambition to be another Sushmita Sen or a Marie Curie.
p.s: before any "tare jameen par" flag bearer start taking about the tragedy of putting pressure on kids for achievement, let me clarify, this topic is not about degree of achievement (irrelevant point) but about shaping destiny.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Hail Master
A long forgotten experience was remembered in the most unlikely circumstances.
It goes back to days when I was a student (and still had ambitions of being educated and before I decided to stay illiterate by shifting to management from science) we had a gentleman called Prof Deb (his Bengali roots are not unimportant but definitely incidental to this story) as one of the teachers.
Prof. Deb was an acknowledged genius world-wide in his chosen field of Physical Chemistry (theoretical Chemistry) with expertise in some abstruse dense field of quantum chemistry.
But even with his awe-inspiring stature, he probably was the most humble and accessible teacher I have ever studied under (and there were other towering personalities in our college - he was the BIGGEST - but none as approachable ).
Anyone could go up to him and ask the stupidest, dumbest, most basic question and he would explain patiently the query till the student was satisfied. Howsoever busy he could be, no student would ever get rebuffed.
I am probably unable to explain what a stalwart he was. And the questions which he answered probably were a waste of his time and an insult to his intellect and time.
Enough ambling, coming back to the story.
So one day I was having a discussion about him with another professor and I happened to mention to him that I find it so surprising the fact Prof. Deb is so very humble.
Prof. Laltu said something which probably I should not have forgotten but would remember for the rest of my life.
He said “The branch that bears fruit hangs low.”
It goes back to days when I was a student (and still had ambitions of being educated and before I decided to stay illiterate by shifting to management from science) we had a gentleman called Prof Deb (his Bengali roots are not unimportant but definitely incidental to this story) as one of the teachers.
Prof. Deb was an acknowledged genius world-wide in his chosen field of Physical Chemistry (theoretical Chemistry) with expertise in some abstruse dense field of quantum chemistry.
But even with his awe-inspiring stature, he probably was the most humble and accessible teacher I have ever studied under (and there were other towering personalities in our college - he was the BIGGEST - but none as approachable ).
Anyone could go up to him and ask the stupidest, dumbest, most basic question and he would explain patiently the query till the student was satisfied. Howsoever busy he could be, no student would ever get rebuffed.
I am probably unable to explain what a stalwart he was. And the questions which he answered probably were a waste of his time and an insult to his intellect and time.
Enough ambling, coming back to the story.
So one day I was having a discussion about him with another professor and I happened to mention to him that I find it so surprising the fact Prof. Deb is so very humble.
Prof. Laltu said something which probably I should not have forgotten but would remember for the rest of my life.
He said “The branch that bears fruit hangs low.”
Monday, January 14, 2008
Diamonds, gold and a little silver – Part 1
“Mirror, Mirror on the wall
Who is the most beautiful of them all?”
Of course, you my lady.
Every fashion, beauty, cosmetic brand has been giving this answer to the consumer since eternity.
Actually all these brands go a step further – they promise beauty. No ordinary beauty - transcendent beauty.
Is anything wrong with this?
No, not at all.
To be noticed, to be attractive, to stand out is the reason we dress up, invest in gold, diamonds, designer clothes and other fashion products.
Colored hair, torn jeans, ear-rings, bald look nothing but renditions of the same need.
All these are in a way are substitutes for success – I’m better than you. I’m special.
Humans are driven in their effort to be exceptional, brilliant, extraordinary.
The leader of the pack - Everyone wants to be special.
These products primarily address this innate need of the humans and beauty is an expression of this need.
Beauty makes you special. Makes you more than what you are or in a human logic shows your true worth – bow you minions to my glowing personality.
Now if you translate this logic into communication for say a jewelry brand, we will find advertising with beautiful women, products proclaiming their uniqueness, intricate designs.
To a detour here, unique is also an expression of beauty. Only unique will make you stand apart from the herd.
In creative expression terms all communication for beauty and jewelry brand stems from – all eyes upon you (person or the product).
But hey, here is my question, if such brands are addressing this special need, can communication for all these brands be clone of each other?
Another no will not be out of order here.
But that is all what we see… beautiful women, focus on designs, drawing attention to uniqueness –in various creative ways but always in the same form.
Now if a new jewelry brand has to enter this industry, how should it convey its differentiator?
Conventional wisdom will take the new brand to the same playing space. It will create footprints in a field already made dirty by many.
Is there a way in which the brand can differentiate itself without breaking away from the core reason for existence?
For this let’s move back and re-look at what is happening there.
Most of the brands have looked at beauty in a uni-dimensional way and focused on the softer aspects of the term - Mushiness, softness, love, longing, yearning.
But enter the deep recesses of your soul, the need does not stem from these feelings.
The true DNA of beauty is based on a baser human – DOMINATION.
DOMINATION
POWER
CONTROL
LUST
Beauty must give you CONTROL. Control over the emotions of others.
A new truth.
A new reality.
To be continued…..
Who is the most beautiful of them all?”
Of course, you my lady.
Every fashion, beauty, cosmetic brand has been giving this answer to the consumer since eternity.
Actually all these brands go a step further – they promise beauty. No ordinary beauty - transcendent beauty.
Is anything wrong with this?
No, not at all.
To be noticed, to be attractive, to stand out is the reason we dress up, invest in gold, diamonds, designer clothes and other fashion products.
Colored hair, torn jeans, ear-rings, bald look nothing but renditions of the same need.
All these are in a way are substitutes for success – I’m better than you. I’m special.
Humans are driven in their effort to be exceptional, brilliant, extraordinary.
The leader of the pack - Everyone wants to be special.
These products primarily address this innate need of the humans and beauty is an expression of this need.
Beauty makes you special. Makes you more than what you are or in a human logic shows your true worth – bow you minions to my glowing personality.
Now if you translate this logic into communication for say a jewelry brand, we will find advertising with beautiful women, products proclaiming their uniqueness, intricate designs.
To a detour here, unique is also an expression of beauty. Only unique will make you stand apart from the herd.
In creative expression terms all communication for beauty and jewelry brand stems from – all eyes upon you (person or the product).
But hey, here is my question, if such brands are addressing this special need, can communication for all these brands be clone of each other?
Another no will not be out of order here.
But that is all what we see… beautiful women, focus on designs, drawing attention to uniqueness –in various creative ways but always in the same form.
Now if a new jewelry brand has to enter this industry, how should it convey its differentiator?
Conventional wisdom will take the new brand to the same playing space. It will create footprints in a field already made dirty by many.
Is there a way in which the brand can differentiate itself without breaking away from the core reason for existence?
For this let’s move back and re-look at what is happening there.
Most of the brands have looked at beauty in a uni-dimensional way and focused on the softer aspects of the term - Mushiness, softness, love, longing, yearning.
But enter the deep recesses of your soul, the need does not stem from these feelings.
The true DNA of beauty is based on a baser human – DOMINATION.
DOMINATION
POWER
CONTROL
LUST
Beauty must give you CONTROL. Control over the emotions of others.
A new truth.
A new reality.
To be continued…..
The Game of the Name
There are four people, named Anand Roy, Rajiv Dutta, Nitin Bakshi and Sandeep Reddy.
Now Anand would be called Andy, Rajiv will become Dutta,, Nitin would stay Nitin and Sandeep Reddy may acquire a random name like Comet.
We have seen such things happen all the time around us.
There are two interesting things to mull over-
1. How do people give such names and the internal logic behind the game– e.g Roy is short enough but Anand will be Andy or why/how for some names we prefer surnames and in others first names?
2. And why even when these people change friends, cities, schools, jobs, they end up with the same name… andy, comet, and so & so forth?
Any thoughts.
Now Anand would be called Andy, Rajiv will become Dutta,, Nitin would stay Nitin and Sandeep Reddy may acquire a random name like Comet.
We have seen such things happen all the time around us.
There are two interesting things to mull over-
1. How do people give such names and the internal logic behind the game– e.g Roy is short enough but Anand will be Andy or why/how for some names we prefer surnames and in others first names?
2. And why even when these people change friends, cities, schools, jobs, they end up with the same name… andy, comet, and so & so forth?
Any thoughts.
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Social Trends 1: The changing “Father – Child” relationship
One social change which probably will find resonance with lots of people with or around young kids is the changed ‘father-child’ dynamics.
Today we find fathers spending more time with their kids and being concerned about their upbringing on a day to day basis.
This is a phenomenon of the recent years, as earlier, at least during my growing up years (and as corroborated by others in my social group) fathers were less involved with their kids and largely limited their roles to the providers of the family. This is not to take away the huge influence they had as role models and custodians of the family values.
The question that begs to be answered is what brought this change?
One can hazard multiple guesses for the same.
One acceptable theory could emanate from the recent trend of ‘metro-sexual’ behavior expected from the men. The society is creating an extraneous pressure and defining acceptable behavior. This in turn gets internalized by men at a micro-level leading to changed behavior and attitude towards certain facets of life. After all what is ‘metro-sexual’ but to exhibit certain female traits (with family as the fulcrum of this definition).
We can approach this from another direction - the nuclear family and working moms. In this case it is not a question of intent but of compulsion. If this was true, there is no change in the desired attitude but the manifestation can be seen in behavior. But this assumption will be bear out on all the parameters.
But in my opinion the reason for the same is different. And there has not been in any change in the attitude. Fathers of the previous years and the fathers today have a similar psychological make-up, what has changed are the social dynamics. And the change we are experiencing today has a direct correlation with the social pressures and expectations.
The fathers measure their success (as a parent) with the success of their children. They largely limit their role to ensuring that the kids are able to realize their potential in the outside world. Twenty-thirty years back (maybe much less) it meant ensuring that they are able to provide the best facilities and amenities. And this would ensure success. The competition probably was much less severe and the definition of success - the bar – was pegged much lower. Doctor, engineer, government official.
Today the parameters of success have changed. And the parents of today find themselves struggling in the new world. The face the ignominy of the unknown every day. Uncertain future. Missed Megabucks. They crave success which was fiefdom of the only the born rich for themselves. But for the majority the opportunity probably is already missed (lack of training, talent, ambition, fear).
To ensure the success of the kids (mega success or the new acceptable benchmarks and standards of success) fathers no longer can play passive roles. They need to actively train their children for the success that they missed.
The responsibility that fathers always believed has remained unmoved only the manifestation & expression has changed.
Today we find fathers spending more time with their kids and being concerned about their upbringing on a day to day basis.
This is a phenomenon of the recent years, as earlier, at least during my growing up years (and as corroborated by others in my social group) fathers were less involved with their kids and largely limited their roles to the providers of the family. This is not to take away the huge influence they had as role models and custodians of the family values.
The question that begs to be answered is what brought this change?
One can hazard multiple guesses for the same.
One acceptable theory could emanate from the recent trend of ‘metro-sexual’ behavior expected from the men. The society is creating an extraneous pressure and defining acceptable behavior. This in turn gets internalized by men at a micro-level leading to changed behavior and attitude towards certain facets of life. After all what is ‘metro-sexual’ but to exhibit certain female traits (with family as the fulcrum of this definition).
We can approach this from another direction - the nuclear family and working moms. In this case it is not a question of intent but of compulsion. If this was true, there is no change in the desired attitude but the manifestation can be seen in behavior. But this assumption will be bear out on all the parameters.
But in my opinion the reason for the same is different. And there has not been in any change in the attitude. Fathers of the previous years and the fathers today have a similar psychological make-up, what has changed are the social dynamics. And the change we are experiencing today has a direct correlation with the social pressures and expectations.
The fathers measure their success (as a parent) with the success of their children. They largely limit their role to ensuring that the kids are able to realize their potential in the outside world. Twenty-thirty years back (maybe much less) it meant ensuring that they are able to provide the best facilities and amenities. And this would ensure success. The competition probably was much less severe and the definition of success - the bar – was pegged much lower. Doctor, engineer, government official.
Today the parameters of success have changed. And the parents of today find themselves struggling in the new world. The face the ignominy of the unknown every day. Uncertain future. Missed Megabucks. They crave success which was fiefdom of the only the born rich for themselves. But for the majority the opportunity probably is already missed (lack of training, talent, ambition, fear).
To ensure the success of the kids (mega success or the new acceptable benchmarks and standards of success) fathers no longer can play passive roles. They need to actively train their children for the success that they missed.
The responsibility that fathers always believed has remained unmoved only the manifestation & expression has changed.
Why Mountian Dew will never do well in India
My views on the current position of Mountain Dew in the category.
Let’s first look at the current TG profile.
At the face it is youth which is further filtered basis the attitude. When addressing the youth the common platform that is taken is “different” but the Mountain Dew youth is the “on the edge different”. If one had to take a typical example if the normal “different youth” would be bunking the class to showcase his freedom, the Mountain Dew youth would be having fun while staying in the class. Everything about him would be an expression of a strong individuality and self-expression, would read Chuck Palanuik rather than Shantaram, would have seen “Old Boy” rather than “Zinda”. Unknown/ Obscure is more exciting than the popular/ known.
The issues
According to me the product faces three issues-
1. A non-cola normally is a substitute drink and not the primary choice. So a category which per se is not very large (in comparative terms), we have a product which is a sub-set of the category and targeted at a segment which in itself is an extremely smaller sub-set of the total market.
2. If one looks at the category the consumer makes a choice over something – I prefer this over that – “Identifiable enemies”. Pepsi vs Coke, Mirinda vs Fanta. So at a product level the “identifiable enemy” should be “Sprite” but for Mountain Dew the enemy is basis the attitudinal point of reference – “Thums Up. So the question that arises – Is it a good anti-point of reference? Maybe not. Thums Up is able to deliver on the attitude basis a very different taste in the category – strong/masculine – and automatically gets clubbed in the parent segment of colas. Though the communication of Mountain Dew has been able to capture the consumer attitude it has not given any clear cues on the product difference.
3. The third key issue is occasion/location of consumption. The non-colas have defined very clear occasion/location situation. Limca/Sprite for thirst, Mirinda/Fanta for taste. “Mountain Dew” the name suggests freshness and the communication cues outdoor but the extreme nature of the communication does not make that easy link with either as the attitude overshadows both. And this leads no reminder for consumption.
The way forward
We will go ahead with the assumption that we are not looking at re-positioning the brand. And the opportunities need to be identified within the existing realities.
Youth – This segment is the high consumption segment, so largely the most attractive segment. If we can make with the Mountain Dew a everyday part of the repertoire of CSD there can be a potential for growth.
a) Associate location/occasion with attitude rather than a physical rendition.
b) Activity seekers – The most visible trend today is the need to be associated with “activity” away from the sedentary fun. People are no longer looking at normal regular modes of enjoyment they are rather seeking something new, something exciting. One can plug in the product with everyday possible but unique activities.
c) Cross-category cues – Maybe I’m going berserk here – direct association with certain brands in similar domain (in attitude or uniqueness) can be used for creating that unique identity of Mountain Dew user. Nike wearers Just Do the Dew.
Overall it is critical that the attitude is owned and rendered into a form which would act is a reminder for consumption.
Let’s first look at the current TG profile.
At the face it is youth which is further filtered basis the attitude. When addressing the youth the common platform that is taken is “different” but the Mountain Dew youth is the “on the edge different”. If one had to take a typical example if the normal “different youth” would be bunking the class to showcase his freedom, the Mountain Dew youth would be having fun while staying in the class. Everything about him would be an expression of a strong individuality and self-expression, would read Chuck Palanuik rather than Shantaram, would have seen “Old Boy” rather than “Zinda”. Unknown/ Obscure is more exciting than the popular/ known.
The issues
According to me the product faces three issues-
1. A non-cola normally is a substitute drink and not the primary choice. So a category which per se is not very large (in comparative terms), we have a product which is a sub-set of the category and targeted at a segment which in itself is an extremely smaller sub-set of the total market.
2. If one looks at the category the consumer makes a choice over something – I prefer this over that – “Identifiable enemies”. Pepsi vs Coke, Mirinda vs Fanta. So at a product level the “identifiable enemy” should be “Sprite” but for Mountain Dew the enemy is basis the attitudinal point of reference – “Thums Up. So the question that arises – Is it a good anti-point of reference? Maybe not. Thums Up is able to deliver on the attitude basis a very different taste in the category – strong/masculine – and automatically gets clubbed in the parent segment of colas. Though the communication of Mountain Dew has been able to capture the consumer attitude it has not given any clear cues on the product difference.
3. The third key issue is occasion/location of consumption. The non-colas have defined very clear occasion/location situation. Limca/Sprite for thirst, Mirinda/Fanta for taste. “Mountain Dew” the name suggests freshness and the communication cues outdoor but the extreme nature of the communication does not make that easy link with either as the attitude overshadows both. And this leads no reminder for consumption.
The way forward
We will go ahead with the assumption that we are not looking at re-positioning the brand. And the opportunities need to be identified within the existing realities.
Youth – This segment is the high consumption segment, so largely the most attractive segment. If we can make with the Mountain Dew a everyday part of the repertoire of CSD there can be a potential for growth.
a) Associate location/occasion with attitude rather than a physical rendition.
b) Activity seekers – The most visible trend today is the need to be associated with “activity” away from the sedentary fun. People are no longer looking at normal regular modes of enjoyment they are rather seeking something new, something exciting. One can plug in the product with everyday possible but unique activities.
c) Cross-category cues – Maybe I’m going berserk here – direct association with certain brands in similar domain (in attitude or uniqueness) can be used for creating that unique identity of Mountain Dew user. Nike wearers Just Do the Dew.
Overall it is critical that the attitude is owned and rendered into a form which would act is a reminder for consumption.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
