Mayank Chhaya Daily

Mohammed Rafi: A willingness to submit his soul to music

On the 36th death anniversary of Mohammed Rafi today, it is only appropriate that I republish my interview Raju Korti, one of the two authors of a definitive book about the great singer. The original appeared barely 16 days ago.

***

If India sang only in two voices, they would be Mohammed Rafi and Lata Mangeshkar’s. While Mangeshkar has become one of the most celebrated symbols of the Indian nationhood, Rafi remains somewhat eclipsed notwithstanding his preternatural talent as a playback singer.

That may have something to do with his death at the relatively young age of 56 in 1980. However, as a singer who straddled an astonishingly eclectic range of songs Rafi’s mystic keeps rejuvenating despite the passage of decades. Notwithstanding his early passing on July 31, 1980, by the time of his death Rafi had already been installed as the first among equals in the pantheon Indian playback singing. With 7,000 songs to his credit in a career spanning over four decades Rafi’s range has been so wide that there is not a mood that he did not capture with unparalleled brilliance.

Although there has been a fair amount of chronicling of Rafi’s life and career, a new book titled “Mohammed Rafi: God’s Own Voice”* by Raju Korti and Dhirendra Jain brings a special scholarly weight of the authors to bear on the subject. Korti, a veteran Mumbai-based journalist and editor as well as a professor of engineering, has been a passionate follower of Rafi’s career for more than four decades. Over the years, he has frequently engaged with a virtual who’s who of Hindi cinema music on what propelled Rafi’s craft. With a vast amount of research accumulated with him and his co-author, including a good many number of detailed conversations with the grandees of Hindi cinema music, Korti’s book offers a remarkable perspective of someone who by any measure was a world-class singer.

In a written interview Korti, who happens to be a friend of mine, answered questions. Excerpts:

Author and Journalist Raju Korti

• Your book is perhaps the first such comprehensive account of someone who is a national treasure. How hard was it to piece together a cohesive narrative in an industry notorious for not preserving anything worthwhile?

A: It took me almost four months to put the biography in black and white. As a fan, I had been closely monitoring Rafi as a person and professional since 1962. In my school days, which was long before I met him, I would make it a point to read and hear every minute thing about him, not necessarily believing everything. The consolidation came after meeting the person and many people in the music industry. Thereafter, it was just a matter of stitching those details together. The easiest part was to write about the man since most of it boiled down to his humility and magnanimity. I agree the film industry is not known to have preserved anything worthwhile but in case of Rafi, his charisma has endured like no one else’s has. The trickiest part was to make sure that no aspect of his professional career was left out. I avoided getting into needless details because that would have made the narrative repetitive. Yet, I don’t believe I have done full justice to the theme because I keep hearing new stories and anecdotes about him regularly. Some come from believable quarters, some from unverifiable quarters. I suppose that is bound to happen when someone has died more than 35 years back but his popularity, if anything, keeps multiplying by the day.

• How did you go about gathering aspects of Rafi’s personal life which underscore his vague reputation as an utterly humble and kind man?

A: I started gathering aspects of Rafi’s life since early sixties, much before I went on to become a professional journalist. First as a music lover and then as a journalist, I was able to collect authentic details from a lot of people including Naushad, Ravi, Shankar-Jaikishen , Jaidev, Salil Choudhury, O P Nayyar, Usha Khanna, RD Burman, Usha Timothy, Manna Dey, Mukesh, Kishore, Talat to name a few. Of course some of the people I have mentioned are lost in the footprints of time but I also spoke to the people who were close to them. I also have in my possession video and audio clips of many of them which I collected painstakingly for 35-40 years.

• One gets the sense that although Rafi ruled the commercially defined film world, he himself lacked the instinct to go for the kill. How do you think he reconciled the two?

A: From my research I have deduced that Rafi didn’t have to go for the kill. He was supremely confident of his craft. Even a cursory look at his career will show that he grafted his way to the top through hard work and exceptional talent. No one lasts in a fickle industry for four decades by fluke - that too at a time when all his contemporaries were no pushovers. Of course, success didn’t come to him overnight. It was some time before he made it to national consciousness. In the forties, he had Talat Mehmood and Mukesh to reckon with. Interestingly, they came after Rafi but were better acknowledged in the forties. Although he never said it, I believe Rafi knew he was the best. Commercial success followed.

• The title of the book “God’s Own Voice” in a way suggests that there may not be much room for a critical appraisal of the man. Was that your apprehension?

A: The title is metaphorical. The book makes no comparison of Rafi with other singers. I could have done that by I didn’t want to ruffle feathers. In any case I didn’t have to. It is a success story that says everything on its own steam. But I do admit that comparisons, though odious, become inevitable especially when the race involves the best. The question of apprehension didn’t arise. There was no one critical in his/her appraisal of the man. Even as a fan, I was objective enough to be matter-of-fact in some of the chapters.

• How do you critically approach a singer whose genius is so universally acknowledged?

A: I agree that people tend to exaggerate about a person who they hero-worship. I met some people who have great admiration for Rafi but believe he was the greatest salesman of the century. That is charitable or uncharitable depending on how you look at it. Of course, he had an ego but he never allowed it to cloud his professional commitments. It was his willingness to submit his soul to music and his peers that made him stand out. That is the reason why you will find very little in his criticism.

•How do you explain Mohammad Rafi’s ever rejuvenating popularity three and half decades after his death?

A: True talent never dies. In Rafi’s case, it came without an expiry date. Two generations have gone after his death, yet, new singers have to sing his songs to make their mark. Let’s see if any other person manages to be as popular more than three decades after his/her death. We all tend to glorify people after their death but to me the amazing aspect here is if anything, Rafi’s popularity keeps multiplying by the day.

• Although there are many registers in male voices in India, Rafi’s feels like the archetypal, defining one. It is as if his was the voice against which all else should be tested. Why do you think that is?

A: To say that his voice was archetypal is not enough. It was complete, equipped to take on all the notes. His versatility was beyond compare. Many people believe that his voice was his ultimate blessing. And it was tinged with the magic guaranteed to get the heart-strings. Perhaps that is why he became a benchmark. There was near unanimity on other singers during his time being good too but they didn’t have the multi-dimensional merit of Rafi. This is, of course, my personal opinion.

• Why do you think Rafi’s voice has traveled so well despite the passage of decades? It is a voice that never feels dated.

A: You answered your own question. His voice is ageless. Just imagine, he died at a young age of 56. But of those, 44 belonged to a stupendous career. I think there are only a handful of examples where one man has dominated a profession this long.

• Is it your sense that Rafi did not just sing songs with all his craft and artistry but, in fact, became a sort of voice actor who got to the very essence of the words, mood and nuance?

A: Initial pages of the book talk precisely about that. In the profession he was in, merely a good voice was not enough. It was his ability to mold it and make it compatible from heroes and zeroes that gave him a universal appeal. They always talk of his voice sitting pretty on all actors, but at the end of the day, it was a Rafi song. Music directors were convinced that his voice would do justice to all songs, any genre. They also conceded that his ability to tap the exact mood of the song was phenomenal. He let his voice do all the talking and didn’t have the necessity to indulge in petty maneuverings to run down or edge past his peers.

• It is extraordinarily rare that when you hear a singer you can tell their quintessential humanity. Rafi was one of those rare names whose singing alone would tell you that he was even a better human being. Did you during your research get that sense?

A: Yes, it was evident from the conversations I had with the people named in the book (also those not named). There are no two opinions that his voice had certain humility to it even when he sang the frothy and zany ones. His singing elevated the song manifold. As a person he was grounded but his song went to the skies in every sense.

• In terms of gathering a diversity of views what were your biggest challenge?

A: In case of Rafi there was almost no diversity of views. Whatever they were, I have mentioned them all in the book. While writing, I have kept my personal fancies aside and tried to portray the picture of a man as he was universally known and also from the prism of few of his detractors. It is the inability of his detractors to prove their point that makes their views as prejudiced. To that extent, let me be honest in admitting that there might be very few things not mentioned in the books of that fans don’t know. It is more of a personal chronicler than a biography. I have only compiled those and pieced them together.

• In at least one review I read that attribution of some of Rafi’s quotes is not entirely verifiable. How do you counter a view like that?

A: We must understand that Rafi died 36 years back. A lot many people are not on the scene anymore. Many of the interviews that I have done happened in the late 70s and later. There was no system of recording interviews at that time. Seniors often told us that good journalists write from good memory without misquoting anybody or cooking up quotes. As a journalist I interviewed and spoke informally to many people from the music fraternity. Not one was contradicted or claimed that I had cooked up my stories. I know of many stories and anecdotes that are not entirely verifiable. Your better instincts tell you which are cooked up or exaggerated. If verifiability is the only yardstick, you cannot write a book at all. There has to be certain dependability on people speaking the truth or being privy to something. If you see, the attributions are not inconsistent with the narrative. Rafi himself was a man of few words. He would, as many journalists say, make a bad copy because his answers would be usually monosyllabic. He never spoke about controversies or ill about his contemporaries. Besides, there are people who did not want to be named for reasons I can only guess. Unverifiable attributions do not necessarily mean they cannot be the truth. Even the people I have quoted are no more. One can always say “what is the authenticity of this?” I can only say that let anyone prove something to the contrary.

• Rafi had worthy male contemporaries, in particular Manna Dey. There are those who might argue that Dey was classically more sound than Rafi although Dey himself has frequently rated Rafi far above himself. How did you approach themes like that?

A: I spoke to Manna Dey twice for more than two hours in 1985-86. In my book I have quoted some composers who believed that Manna was classically better trained. But the singer himself admitted to me how, from day one, Rafi was better than him. If what I wrote was not authentic, there are any number of video clips on YouTube where he says it in flesh and blood. Manna was vocal but a few others were not so vocal. That is even if you make peace with the fact that one singer would normally always concede the other as a better one out of sheer grace, but don’t forget the competition was stiff and the stakes were high even in those days.

• Do you think that a phenomenon like Rafi, or for that matter some of his male and female contemporaries, may no longer be possible given the evolution of Hindi cinema as well as technology?

A: My personal opinion is that time has gone. The fifties and sixties are still considered as the golden era of music. Technological advances have killed the craft of singing. And what can you expect with revenge and fighting as themes of today’s films? Naushad would often tell me that Hindustani music was forever and the golden period would come back later than sooner. I disagreed with him and knew he was speaking out of hopeless optimism.

• Is it possible now to have a voice that pretty much defines the nation?

A: May be, but I don’t think so.

(* Hardcover: 364 pages, Publisher: Niyogi Books (March 8, 2016), Language:English, ISBN-10: 9385285165, ISBN-13: 978-9385285165)

Dr. Deepak Acharya’s herbal mantra begins to resonate

Ahmedabad, India based ethnobotanist Dr. Deepak Acharya (All photos courtesy of Dr. Acharya)

Ethnobotanist Deepak Acharya has the heart of an indigenous tribesman and mind of a highly trained scientist. As a passionate popularizer of millennia-old herbal medicinal system, Dr. Acharya spends a much of his time scouring through the heart of India’s tribal lands in the three states of Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan.

Over the past 18 years his seemingly vagabond sojourns in to the tribal regions of Patalkot in Madhya Pradesh, the Dangs in Gujarat and the Aravallis in Rajasthan have led him to amass 30,000 medicinal formulations. Deepak is not a wide-eyed and unsuspecting advocate of traditional medicine but believes in systematic authentication and validation through detailed scientific analysis of the vast tribal knowledge in order to transform India’s health sector.

Although he runs his own herbal health company Abhumka Herbal Private Limited, which he cofounded, but is acutely aware that in order to scale up the country’s traditional knowledge India needs a massive national effort.

“Indian medicinal plant flora counts around 17600 plant species. Out of which, Ayurveda system of medicine uses around 900 plant species in its formulations whereas Unani uses 700 species, Siddha 600 species, Amchi 250 species and the modern medicine (Allopathy) uses around 30 species respectively. Interestingly, the tribal or rural folk medicine system uses 8000 species. The knowledge is yet to be documented and validated extensively,” he says.

Deepak, whose Facebook page bursts with colors of herbal plants, has in recent years gain considerable traction as someone who offers remedies for a variety of ailments based on traditional tribal cures. He is a widely read newspaper columnist even though his primary calling remains creating a scientific data base of India’s traditional herbal knowledge.

He answered some of my questions. Excerpts:

MC: Neem and turmeric have become emblematic of the popular understanding of herbal/ traditional/ alternative form of medicinal/ health formulations. The reality is, of course, much deeper. Can you describe based on your extensive work how sizable the traditional knowledge base is in India?

DA: According to herbal healers in Dangs (Gujarat), “there is not a single herb that is useless”. It is indeed true; there has not been a single civilization on earth that has not included herbs as medicines in its historical record. Herbs have been an integral part in the development of the modern civilization.

The traditional storage of ethnobotanical knowledge in memory and practices has a long history and must go back to the beginning of human existence. One of the most important sources is the Rig Veda (1200-900 BC), which has been useful in the attempt to identify the source of the traditional medicine system, also known as ‘Ayurveda’. Application of such herbal remedies has also been mentioned in the Atharva Veda (around 3,000 to 2,000 BC). It was in the 19th century when scientists started focusing on the active components found in herbs that gave a way to the research on molecular level.

The indigenous Indian tribal people have accrued considerable knowledge in this field of potential interest and they very well identify the plants which could be utilized at potential source of medicine for human, animal and agri-health. The tribal people have their own cultures, customs, cults, religious rites, taboos, totems, legends and myths, folk tales and songs, witchcrafts, medical practices etc. They are the repository of accumulated experience and knowledge of indigenous vegetation that has not been properly utilized for the economic development.

Around 560 indigenous groups can be distinguished by linguistic and cultural differences and by geographical separation in India. Over 90% of tribal population in India; depend on traditional medical practices for day-to-day health care.

MC: India abounds in tribes which in various stages of transition because of the onslaught of modern/urban economic development. What in your estimation might be the reserve of herbal formulations across India?

DA: Indian medicinal plant flora counts around 17600 plant species. Out of which, Ayurveda system of medicine uses around 900 plant species in its formulations whereas Unani uses 700 species, Siddha 600 species, Amchi 250 species and the modern medicine (Allopathy) uses around 30 species respectively. Interestingly, the tribal or rural folk medicine system uses 8000 species. The knowledge is yet to be documented and validated extensively.

Traditional herbal knowledge can be the major source of new pharmaceuticals. In the 20th century, however, advances in molecular biology and pharmacology led to a precipitous decline in the importance of ethnobotany in drug discovery programs but the pendulum is slowly swinging back. It is possible to accomplish in a few minutes what once took months to analyze in the lab by making TMP (Traditional Medicinal Practices) a source of information. Indeed, it is an age old, tried, tested and trusted practice. As a result, in the recent times, products purely based on indigenous knowledge are in demand in the market. Now an extensive validation and value addition to the herbal knowledge is highly needed so that we bring more indigenous knowledge based products in market.

MC: You have amassed some 30,000 formulations yourself. Can you describe the range of these formulations and what they do to improve human health?

DA: We have documented these formulations from three remote tribal pockets in India-- Patalkot (Madhya Pradesh), the Dangs (Gujarat) and the Aravallis (Rajasthan). The formulations are documented on the basis of firsthand information, cross verification with the patients those who visit herbal healers and these validated by our volunteers working in the field. We have digitized it and we are planning further to create a huge repository of digitized traditional knowledge, which otherwise was available only on oral domain, floated from generations to generations.

We have a wide range of documented formulations for curing cough to treating cancer, though scientific validation and value addition is yet to be done for thousands of formulation due to the lack of infrastructure and our own expertise in many fields. Frankly speaking, we cannot do all this, as we are a very small enterprise. We are always open for any sort of collaboration that helps us in new drug development program. The documented formulations cater solutions for around 150 disorders that mainly include: cough & cold, arthritis, diabetes, kidney stone, hemorrhoids, blood pressure, obesity, brain disorders, anemia, depression, life style disorders, cancer, gynecological problems, vitality issues, and many others. We have formulations for veterinary and agri-health care also.

MC: There are many foundations working in the area of local health traditions. Do you believe India has a significant national program to preserve its enormously rich local health traditions?

DA :As of now, there is no concrete action taken by the agencies so far. Though there is an AYUSH ministry, several Universities and other private and non-government organizations working collectively to uplift the local health tradition system but the current approach is insufficient to preserve, document, validate and value addition to it. There has to be a systematic protocol in the place but sadly, it lacks.

MC: You have extensively traveled and chronicle India’s tribal areas over the years. Which are the most important challenges that tribes people face when it comes to not just preserving their generational knowledge but ensuring that it crosses over into the mainstream?

DA: Tribal herbal healers, deficient a printed lingo, rely on oral traditions to transmit their olden times and gathered knowledge from one generation to the next. Unfortunately, in Gujarat and other remote tribal pockets in India, young generation of these tribal groups is merely interested in knowing the secrets of medicinal plants. They are now influenced by the modern world and think that they can earn more money by doing labor work for others.

Indeed, it is true that herbal healers are not paid enough for the creative and curative services they do for the society. They are deprived of recognition and credit. The new generation does not know the potential of knowledge of their elderly. Healers too are also not much interested in sharing their knowledge with the new generation. They want to transfer this knowledge to safe hands so that it is safeguarded and used for the welfare of the society.

It is, in fact, a need of the hour to establish a Traditional Medicine Centers in the tribal dominated areas as to monitor and promote the collection of herbs from the healers through the research agencies/ companies or other institutions. In an attempt to safeguard traditional medicine knowledge, it is necessary that inventories of plants with therapeutic value are carried out, and the knowledge related to their use is documented in systematic studies. These studies can have other values for society besides conserving traditional knowledge, such as, to identify plants with market potential that can help generate incomes for local communities.

As a backward integration, tribal people should be encouraged to cultivate of medicinal plants. For instance, a company comes up with an indigenous knowledge based product; they would require raw herbal material in large quantity. For this, tribal groups or Mandali can be formed and encouraged for the cultivation of such needed material. This will provide them with an open market of herbs and also this ex situ conservation of medicinal plant will support forest and medicinal herb conservational activities.

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) of the grassroots knowledge holders should be respected and rewarded. It is indeed necessary to provide them a sense of security.

We must consider seriously the importance of medicinal plants in the developing countries. In many cases, these countries simply cannot afford to spend millions of dollars on imported medicines, which they could produce or extract from their tropical forest plants. Indigenous medicines are relatively inexpensive; they are locally available and are usually readily accepted by the people. The ideal situation would be the establishment of local pharmaceutical firms that would create jobs, reduce unemployment, reduce import expenditures, generate foreign exchange, encourage documentation of traditional ethno medicinal lore, and be based on the conservation and sustainable use of the tropical forests.

MC: One of the most heard complaints/observations about traditional medicine is that the lack of testing and empirical data. Do you think that is a valid point and if so what can be done to give it the kind of scientific underpinnings that can help it emerge as a truly universal alternative way?

DA: To authenticate, validate and make scientific sense, there has to be a scientific background to disseminate the knowledge about herbs and their role. It is quite wrongly claimed that herbs have no side effects or counter action. Many herbs are toxic in nature; there has been a confined dosage of intake of the herbs, without any knowledge of scientific study i.e. toxicity, these herbs should not be included in any formulations.

MC: You are known to offer many remedies for everyday health problems based on your work. Is there a way for you to institutionalize it and make it into a consolidated enterprise?

DA: There is a greater need to set up enterprises like Abhumka Herbal (cofounded by me) that is deeply engrossed in scouting and documentation of age old tried-tested- trusted knowledge. We are translating this knowledge into finished products using tools of modern science. Also, to involve more and more people in this mission, we have created a common platform called “Swadeshi Gyan Abhiyan” (Campaign for Indigenous Knowledge). This campaign not only ensures a regular income to the volunteers known as “Swadesh Sainiks” but also creates a pool of indigenous healthcare innovation and knowledge.

MC: How do you think tribal people view the way India has changed over the decades, especially in the last quarter century of economic reform and the way it has impacted them?

DA: If you talk about urban-connected tribal region, there has been a big change seen in tribal life, obviously due to the influence of urban life. A major impact can be seen among the young generations. They seem to be more aware and advanced today. They carry mobile handsets, they have sports bikes, branded clothes and they play DVDs and DJ’s in their marriages. Somewhere in the midst of this so-called modernization, they have lost touch with their own age-old traditions, rituals and also they are not interested in learning traditional herbal knowledge.

MC: Do you think an important reason why despite poor public health infrastructure if a vast population of underprivileged Indians have managed to address their health issues is because of the traditional knowledge base?

DA: Yes, cent per cent agree.

MC: Do you as an advocate of traditional medicine encounter serious skepticism and even cynicism from ordinary people as well as the medical establishment? How do you get around that to make it available more widely?

There has been a great deal of suspicion, secrecy and hostilities existing between traditional healers and modern doctors. To achieve these objectives and those of health for all by the year 2016 and thereafter, open heart dialogue between the two disciplines of medicines is a must. For neither allopathic nor traditional medicine alone can adequately meet the health needs of our nation. We need to strengthen training and research on traditional medicine, and start with the most readily feasible herbal remedies. We should boost our national economies by joining forces in preventive, community, and productive health care for our people.

MC: How long has it taken for you to create 30,000 formulations?

DA: Almost 18 years

MC: What percentage of your formulations can be scaled up commercially?

DA: Just imagine, we have a pool of 30000 practices and so far, we could develop only 18 formulations commercially. There is a huge opportunity to scale up the remaining formulations.

Hieronymus Bosch: Touched by the Devil

Apple’s movie trailer site is among the sites I visit regularly to keep track of this, that and the other. I am a sucker for anything visual and these days movie and even documentary trailers have become rather innovative. A couple of days ago I found the trailer of a documentary called “Hieronymus Bosch: Touched by the Devil”. The name intrigued me because it sounded familiar. It felt as if I might have written about Bosch. A quick search of my blog revealed that I indeed had, on July 1, 2013. The post was titled “Admiring ‘The Pedlar’ by Jheronimus Bosch.”

Bosch’s bizarre images had captivated me then and struck me that they lent themselves rather well to a film or a documentary. Three years hence director Pieter van Huystee has made a 90-minute documentary which is receiving strong critical notices.

The synopsis of the documentary says this: “In 2016, the Noordbrabants Museum in the Dutch city of Den Bosch held a special exhibition devoted to the work of Hieronymus Bosch, who died 500 years ago. This late-medieval artist lived his entire life in the city, causing uproar with his fantastical and utterly unique paintings in which hell and the devil always played a prominent role. In preparation for the exhibition, a team of Dutch art historians crisscrosses the globe to unravel the secrets of his art. They use special infrared cameras to examine the sketches beneath the paint, in the hope of discovering more about the artist's intentions. They also attempt to establish which of the paintings can be attributed with certainty to Bosch himself, and which to his pupils or followers. The experts shuttle between Den Bosch, Madrid and Venice, cutting their way through the art world's tangle of red tape, in a battle against the obstacle of countless egos and conflicting interests. Not every museum is prepared to allow access to their precious art works.”

Here is what I wrote three years ago:

 

Five hundreds and thirteen years after it was painted, Jheronimus Bosch’s master painting ‘The Pedlar’ has come as a revelation this morning. I neither knew of Bosch nor ‘The Pedlar’ until this morning and but for my obsessive visits to the Google Art Project, I would not have discovered them.

‘The Pedlar’, on the face of it, seems like a man peddling things. And he probably was in Bosch’s preliminary imagination. However, a description in the Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen, which is the only museum in the Netherlands with a collection of paintings by Bosch, says, “This vagabond or pedlar with mismatched shoes is symbolic of man on his path through life. He is a kind of 'Everyman' a popular late 15th century moral tale. He represents the 'homo viator', the pilgrim who goes through life weighed down by the baggage of his earthly existence. He suffers his lot along a path full of temptations.”

As I always do, I have zoomed in and sliced the painting down to various corners in order to bring out fantastic details of Bosch’s vision.

In the first frame, apart from the pedlar’s evocative expression, notice details such as his stubble, hair, creased up neck and so on.

In this frame see the man urinating and also notice the stream. Also, don’t miss what looks like a raccoon hide hanging from his wicker basket.

This one has a woman peering out of a window, one of whose shutters has come unhinged. The woman’s expression is one of nervous curiosity at seeing the pedlar. Check out the man and woman in the doorway engaged in something urgent even as a caged bird looks on.

This frame, of course, has been a matter of much comment because it shows mismatched shoes. I am also struck by the dog’s expression. (See below)

And finally, the owl and woodpecker complete the picture.

Of course, there are other details such as a rooster and a bunch of pigs as well as cattle and people in the distance.

P.S.: After watching the documentary’s trailer I revisited the Google Art Project site to look at Bosch’s work again. It dramatically refreshed my memory about how stunningly weird Bosch’s visual imagination was. Just a couple of instances should be enough to illustrate that.

“The Temptation of Saint Antony”  (1520/1530), a triptych on an oak panel contains some disturbing but captivating images. An accompanying description says that the panel “is an allegory of the perdition which reigns over the earth, symbolized by those whose behavior or social associations are reprehensible.” Let me just cite a couple pieces from that panel.

For reasons I do not understand fish appears to be a preferred means of transport, either in the air or in the water. There is also some preponderance of marine life.

Take the image below, for instance. It has a figure in an armor riding one fish while carrying another one toward a another figure on top of a giant frog with some bizarre creature emerging from underneath.

Or this one where a bird appears to be attacking a grotesquely deformed man in a boat.

I read that Bosch became so popular in his lifetime that there were several forgeries made of his panels. As of now only 25 or so have been authenticated as having been created by him.

If course, Bosch was not all about foreboding, doomsday visions. His  “Saint John the Baptist in the Desert” painting features St. John meditating in a richly imagined landscape. I was struck by the brilliant color of his robe as well the detail in the flora. 

Michael Bloomberg throws some serious billionaire shade

Presuming that billionaires are necessarily superior to the penurious swinish multitudes of which I am a prime member, one must pay attention to what Michael Bloomberg said yesterday about Donald Trump. One of these two men is a real billionaire while the other insists that he is one too.

Bloomberg, in throwing some serious shade, said this of Trump during his speech at the Democratic National Convention yesterday, “I am a New Yorker and I know a con when I see one.”

This after calling him a “bomb thrower” and a “dangerous demagogue” who as a businessman has “a well-documented record of bankruptcies, thousands of lawsuits, angry stockholders and contractors who feel cheated and disillusioned customers who feel ripped off. “Trump says he wants to run the nation like he’s running his business? God help us,” Bloomberg said to rapturous cheers.

You might think the 74-year-old former mayor of New York whose real time net worth as of this morning, according to Forbes, is $47.7 billion, would have been done with this stinging rebuke but he had more when he implied that Trump is neither sane nor competent. He even said, “Truth be told, the richest thing about Donald Trump is his hypocrisy” in a not so subtle crack at Trump’s wealth.

I began with the absurd proposition that billionaires are superior to the rest of us but let’s continue that for a moment or two more. If that is the measure of a person’s intelligence than Bloomberg is reputedly ten times smarter than Trump because that is how much richer he is supposed to be.

If this extraordinary endorsement of Hillary Clinton coming from a politically independent billionaire can still not get her into the White House, I don’t know what to say. And that too just one day after Trump openly called on Russia to hack American computers to find Clinton’s reportedly missing 30,000 emails. If someone other than Trump had stood up in Central Park in New York and called on Russia to hack former secretary of state’s server to gain access to her emails, the FBI would be all over that person.

As an aside, I think in Russia’s President Vladimir Putin Trump perhaps sees a role model because the former is said to be much richer, lives in an obscenely ornate palace, rules without entertaining any opposition and eats hubris for breakfast.

One looks at Trump and wonders whether he knows that there is a real world outside of his mind that is actually listening to all that he says and does. Actually, there has not been a presidential candidate who is as acutely aware of the real world outside his mind as Trump. He says whatever he says fully aware of its implications. That is where Bloomberg’s description of him as a bomb throwing demagogue comes in.

Trump operates so much outside the norm that it is no longer possible to adjudicate on his case with normal standards. Here is a man who has led a life of absolute conceit without any need for external reinforcement or vindication or correction. It is a self-perpetuating narcissistic loop. Now that he has found a receptive and captive audience, which at best agrees with him and at worst couldn’t care less about his consequence, he has become unstoppable. It is almost as if some unseen force is propelling him. How else can one explain that polls suggest he is ahead of Clinton and could win?

Those who do the complex electoral math insist that there is no way Trump could win with tens of millions of independent voters who would eventually settle for Clinton. I am not so sure because oftentimes in life bomb-throwing for the sake of it is known to irresistibly draw people. Let’s hope this does not turn out to be one such time. In my limited exposure to America’s electoral system, which has meant watching and reporting four presidential campaigns since I arrived in 1998, I have not seen a candidate, namely Hillary Clinton, who has been so eminently qualified for the job as president. Yet, and I am fusing Bloomberg’s descriptions of Trump into one, a dangerously demagogic, bomb-throwing con of doubtful sanity could win against her.

Mother as elemental visual memory

Ma in the Window by MC

It is amazing how certain visual memories plant themselves so firmly in one’s brain. Late last year, when my mother Snehlata visited us, I had taken a photograph of her one early morning as she stood by the living room window. She seemed contemplative and made for an evocative shot. I had my phone handy and managed to capture the moment (See below).

My mother Snehlata

Yesterday, as I was playing around with a virtual canvas on Fresh Paint some lines began to form. They started with the window frame and progressed to a few strokes of a figure standing by it. By the time I finished I had two versions of the same embedded visual memory. The fact that the memory involved my mother made it easy to remember her somewhat stooped, shrunken frame (She is 85 now). Of all memories, I think mother’s is the most elemental, the most fundamental. Everything else feels proximate.

There was no immediate provocation to remember her visually. But that’s the whole point of something elemental. It just materializes without any recognizable volition. The artwork took me about ten minutes to finish. It was that quick because that’s how quick virtual painting because it does not involve any elaborate paraphernalia.  Of course, it helps if one has some talent for art, even if it is a very minor one like mine.

This and that about Rajesh Khanna V. Naseeruddin Shah

The Indian media, like the rest of the world, revels in ridiculous controversies. The latest one involves two actors, actually one superstar and one actor.

In an interview with Yashika Mathur of The Hindustan Times actor Naseeruddin Shah was quoted as saying this about the late superstar Rajesh Khanna: “In fact, it was the 70’s when mediocrity came in Hindi films. That’s when the actor called Rajesh Khanna joined the industry. For all his success, I think Mr. Khanna* was a very limited actor. In fact, he was a poor actor. Intellectually, he wasn’t the most alert person I have ever met. His taste ruled the industry.”

Shah is known for his candor which is often dipped in caustic resentment. Regarded as one of India’s finest actors Shah’s word on cinema carries weight and he is known for telling it like he sees it. His dismissive comments about Mr. Khanna, celebrated as India’s first superstar, touched off an extremely minor controversy as his daughter, former actor herself and now a popular columnist and writer Twinkle tweeted this to Shah: “Sir if u can't respect the living ,respect the dead--mediocrity is attacking a man who can't respond.”

The usually bilious army of social media users expressed their contempt for Shah who had the audacity to knock down a deity of Hindi cinema from his pedestal while few seemed to concur with him about Mr. Khanna’s craft.

All this was amusing to me for about ten minutes or so, especially because I knew Mr. Khanna well for close to a quarter century and had numerous occasions to talk about many not necessarily news-worthy subjects. One of those subjects was his opinion about fellow actors. In the mid 1980s when after firming up his reputation as a grandee of what was then called art cinema Shah was transiting to the kind of movies that Mr. Khanna once ruled, it was interesting to find out what Mr. Khanna thought of actors like him. “I admire Satyajeet Ray movies very much. I may never act in them but I see their great merit. I also admire actors of art cinema such as Naseer, Shabana (Azmi) and Om Puri. They are stars in their own right,” he told me once. Mr. Khanna said he found Shah particularly “intense” and would be keen to work with him.

He did pair up successfully with Azmi in over half a dozen films and thought very highly of her. However, to my recollection he never acted with Shah. He knew that the prospects of the two coming together were next to zero. Having been who he had been—namely Rajesh Khanna the superstar—he did not seem to spend much energy on such what-ifs unless he was specifically asked. One had to be inside his world to know what it meant to have the kind of worshipful frenzy that surrounded him for so long and that too in his 20s.

Contrary to his well-known self-absorption, I frequently witnessed a rather refreshingly reflective man who could detach the superstar from himself. In what I think is perhaps his most telling observation about himself, Mr. Khanna told me, “I am Jatin (his real name). I am the sole custodian of Rajesh Khanna. He works for me.” I found that to be a remarkable view of self.

I mention this particular observation of Mr. Khanna’s about himself in the context of Shah’s remark that “Intellectually, he wasn’t the most alert person I have ever met.” In Shah’s defense, it is true that most people never saw the more contemplative, intellectually refined side of the man.

It is not my case at all that Mr. Khanna was a universally respected actor. In fact, there is a considerable body of opinion that found his craft pretty much in the ballpark of what Shah says. Such things are always a matter of personal tastes and opinion. I offer no opinion either way because it is irrelevant.

Shah has since apologized to “those who were personally offended”, adding, “My intention was not to attack him but to talk about how a certain phase in history affected the course of Hindi cinema.” Twinkle has tweeted, “This has gone far enough,can everyone please stop,we have all stated our opinions now can everyone go play Pokemon!”

So it’s all good now. Earth survives yet another extremely minor spat about an extremely minor subject whose shelf life is shorter than Kardashian sisters’ clothes.

* I normally do not use formal salutation such as Mr. I do so here by the force of habit since that’s how I addressed him.

I am now but a shadow of my former shadow

Since I woke up with the first line around 2.30 in the morning I thought one might as well run with it this morning. The second line came just as I was beginning to contemplate what to write today. The Hindi translation was rather swift. One is immensely grateful to Shabdkosh, a great resource online.

I am now but a shadow of my former shadow

Like the scattering edge of a fading eclipse

अब तो मैं अपने ही साये का साया बनके रह गया हूँ

जैसे ग्रहणके कोर का छितराव

Mayank Chhaya

Syed Haider Raza, 1922-2016

While going through some of the works of the great master Syed Haider Raza as a response to his death at 94 yesterday I chanced upon this 1963 work. It represents Raza’s view of a village which seems to be splintering. What struck me about the painting though was what he has quoted on the top right in Sanskrit.

It is the iconic Vedic mantra आ नो भद्राः क्रतवो यन्तु विश्वतः (Aano Bhadrah Krtavo Yantu Vishwatah) or “Let noble thoughts come to me from all directions.” That one line could well sum up the painter’s life who spent close to 60 years in France before returning to India in 2002. A grand figure of modern Indian art and a pioneer of the Progressive movement Raza was among those great names that created a new Indian aesthetic the way the Impressionists did in Paris in the 19th century. It was somewhat poetic that Paris is where Raza spent such an extended part of his life.

Raza along with Maqbool Fida Husain, Francis Newton Souza,, Krishna Howlaji Ara, Hari Ambadas Gade, and S Bakre, a sculptor, founded the the Progressive Artists Group.While Husain and Souza appeared to capture a certain ferment in their lines, Raza was more into capturing a calm symmetry. I found a 1951 work of his titled “Carcassone” of a French town that showcased his sense of symmetry even while avoiding being an engineering drawing. You can see the same sense of being anchored or settled in the untitled work from 1983/84.

Carcassone, S H Raza, 1951

Untitled 1983/84, Raza

Although tributes to Raza prominently mention his famous Bindu (Point) series which drew on the concentrated singularity of a point that was as philosophical as spiritual to him, Raza’s early decades were characterized by a lot of landscape and other kinds of works. The artist who drew him to Paris was Paul Cézanne (1839–1906), widely regarded as the founder of modern art.

Much of his work comes across as self-consciously free of clutter and complication even though his geometrical lines are very hard to emulate. Take the untitled work above, for instance. As simple as it seems it is rather complex to reproduce. One gets the sense that even Raza himself may have found it hard duplicate it.

In his passing, India has lost a truly pluralist artist who lived by the idea of letting noble thoughts come from all directions.

Shashi Kapoor: A beloved, sensible star

As the youngest of the Kapoor brothers,the grandees of Hindi cinema, shining on his own merit might have been a particularly difficult endeavor for actor and producer Shashi Kapoor. However, a cursory glance at the now retired 78-year-old Kapoor would suggest an extraordinary career to the contrary, both as once Hindi cinema’s busiest star and a producer who took unusual risks in aid of sensible cinema.

It is a testimony to his craft and commitment to cinema and theater that Kapoor was conferred India’s highest cinema honor of the Dadasaheb Phalke Award in 2014.

For someone who began as a child actor in 1948, Kapoor has seen quite a remarkable span of over five decades in cinema with some 160 movies to his credit, including 12 in the English language. He was the first Indian movie star to “cross over” before the term cross over began to be thrown about so casually.

In chronicling his career, New York-based journalist, writer and columnist Aseem Chhabra fills an important gap in India film history. Aseem’s book ‘Shashi Kapoor—The Householder, The Star’ * is a long overdue account of an actor who in many ways embodied the quintessence of Hindi cinema.

Hands down the most handsome actor of his generation Kapoor had to often compensate for his looks that seemed to frequently overshadow his obvious talents as an actor. By the same token, those very looks also initially opened many doors for him.

Aseem offers an insightful look inside the life and career of one of Hindi cinema’s most interesting figures known to be polite to a fault and unusually shorn of celebrity airs.

His book can and should be bought here: https://www.amazon.com/Shashi-Kapoor-Householder-Aseem-Chhabra/dp/8129139707

It is distributed via Amazon in the US, UK, Europe and India. It is also available in stores in India.

Aseem answered my questions via an email interview.

• At some level Shashi Kapoor is such an ideal choice for a book and yet it had to wait so long. Why do you think that is?

I know a few people had wanted to write books on Shashi Kapoor. Madhu Jain and Anil Dharker both tried, but Shashi discouraged them. Madhu then wrote a terrific book on the entire Kapoor clan.

I agree a tribute to this fine actor and star was long overdue.

 

Writer and journalist Aseem Chhabra (Photo: Raja Sen)

• What was your first connecting point to him as an actor? What drew you in?

I believe that would Sharmeelee, which I saw as a teenager at Delhi’s Regal cinema. I loved his charm, uber good looks when he sang Khilte Hain Gul Yahan and later when he was terribly sad singing Kaise Kahen Hum. Around that time I also discovered his earlier films, including Jab Jab Phool Khile and Pyar Ka Mausam, both of which I first watched in black and white on Doordarshan.

• For many of a certain generation who remember Kapoor they do so for his looks. I had asked Shashi Kapoor in 1985 at the height of his intense preoccupation with mainstream Hindi cinema how his obvious handsomeness might have undercut his natural gift as an actor. He just flashed his famous boyish smile and said, “Ab uska kya karen?” (Now what do I do about that?) You refer early on to this factor. How much do you think his looks took away from his assessment as a gifted actor?

I think for the longest time Hindi filmmakers just cashed in on his good looks, boyish charm and smile. But he was lucky to work with filmmakers like James Ivory since that gave him the chance to explore his acting muscles. By the time Shyam Benegal directed Shashi Kapoor in Junoon and Kalyug, it was very clear that this man was one of the finest actors in the Hindi film industry.

• Although he could have sailed smooth on the strength of just his looks, as you note, he has been intuitively multifarious in his choices. ‘Namak Halal’, ‘Heat and Dust’, ‘Junoon’ and ‘Gautam Govinda’ are a testimony to that. What do you think propelled him?

Once Shashi Kapoor accepted the norms and the rules of the Hindi cinema he never questioned what those films demanded from him. But he was always hungry for more – largely due to his early training in theater at his father’s and father-in-law’s drama companies. But his wife Jennifer also helped shaped his artistic sensibilities. Shashi was fortunate to have met Ismail Merchant and James Ivory so early on in his working life. So he was able to balance the demands of the Hindi commercial cinema with the more art-house Merchant Ivory Productions films.

• He was easily among the most dignified and primly behaved major stars of his time. Do you think his inherent goodness reflected in his roles and in a sense that might have diluted his standing a bit?

It is true that Shashi often played the good guy in films ranging from Deewar to Kabhi Kabhie, where I believe he essentially was asked to be himself. He was always a big star – at least in the 1970s and 1980s, but his standing was diluted for other factors. First just as Shashi was making a big splash in the late 1960s, Rajesh Khanna appeared on the scene with a bang. Rajesh Khanna had 17 hits in three years. And just when Rajesh Khanna’s star began to decline, Amitabh Bachchan started playing the showy angry young man roles.

But throughout this period Shashi Kapoor remained a consistent actor. He somewhat played a negative character in a film like Chor Machaye Shor, but even there his heart was in the right place.

• You speak of his persona as the star being the aspect of his life that worked the most for you. What particular qualities as a star that excited you?

I loved watching Shashi Kapoor the star on the screen in many films, including some I have mentioned above. But what I liked the most about Shashi Kapoor was that he used his star status and invested money in some of the best films made in India in late-1970s and1980s – Junoon, Kalyug, 36 Chowringhee Lane and Vijeta. That to me is his greatest contribution as a star.

• How much of his no-fuss, no-airs approach to his cinema career was shaped by his seven years at Prithvi Theatre from 1953?

Shashi Kapoor’s entire adult life was shaped by his years at Prithvi Theatre where the most important thing he learned from his father was to treat everyone equal – whether it is a big star like Amitabh Bachchan or a junior technician. That is the reason why until today Shashi Kapoor is well loved in the Hindi film industry. He was genuinely kind and caring towards everyone.

• Is it your sense that Kapoor could have just as easily chosen a career in stage over cinema but for the money that the latter promised and he needed?

Yes, that is clear from my interviews with his children and also everything I read about him. Shashi Kapoor was a reluctant film actor. But he made big compromises early on because he had to earn money to support his family. The remarkable thing that is that he never regretted his decision. As Sharmila Tagore told me, once he would take on a project he would not spend time mulling over how bad the film was, etc. He did what the directors and producers asked him to do.

• One curious area of Kapoor’s career that has drawn me is his movies in the West. My sense has always been that he could have been a true global star in the mold of Omar Sharif. You specifically mention how his father-in-law Geoffrey Kendal felt Kapoor should have taken up a career in the West. Why do you think he chose not to more than he did?

I think Omar Sharif is an interesting case. In casting Omar in big films, Hollywood accepted a very foreign looking, although very handsome and talented actor. I don’t know why Shashi did not get the same opportunities after a film like Heat and Dust. But then despite its success and critical acclaim Heat and Dust was never as big as say Lawrence of Arabia and Doctor Zhivago. What worked for Shashi was that he did get occasional work from foreign productions throughout his career – from Siddhartha in 1972 to Sammy and Rosie Get Laid in 1987. When the Pakistani filmmaker Jamil Dehlavi was looking for an actor with an international stature to play the narrator opposite Christopher Lee’s Jinnah, he immediately thought of Shashi Kapoor. And Jinnah was one of Shashi’s last films.

• What do you remember of having watched ‘Heat and Dust’ during its opening week in New York? What were your feelings watching Shashi Kapoor on big screen in New York?

I think there was a real sense of excitement even when I stood in the line outside the Paris theater in Manhattan. The fact that I was going to watch a film with a Hindi movie star who I greatly admired. Watching the film in the theater, I was able to connect that moment with my life in India, as a teenager when I saw films like Deewar and Sharmeelee.

• Don’t you think ‘Heat and Dust’ should have propelled him to greater things in Hollywood?

I agree with you. And it is really unfortunate. Heat and Dust made a star out of Greta Scacchi. Shashi got a lot of notice in the press, but that did not translate into more international work for him. But it was also the time when Jennifer was unwell. She died one year after the release of Heat and Dust. Shashi took a brief break but then he continued to work. New Delhi Times was shot immediately after Jennifer’s death and Shashi gave one of his finest performances in that film.

Also after Heat and Dust, the Merchant Ivory team began to focus on their British and American films and there was no work for Shashi in those productions.

• How much was his intense preoccupation with Hindi movies responsible for not allowing him the freedom to pursue a bigger career in Hollywood?

My sense is that Shashi Kapoor never went seeking work. He got a lot of work from the Hindi film industry and he did not say no to any filmmaker. Shashi started the shift system in the Hindi film industry and it made lot of physical demands on him. But then he did take whatever non-Indian work he got. He agreed to work in a film like Sammy and Rosie Get Laid even though at that time Stephen Frears and Hanif Kureishi were not big names.

(*Hardcover: 216 pages, Publisher: Rupa Publications (May 1, 2016), Language: English, ISBN-10: 8129139707, ISBN-13: 978-8129139702)

Some rather routine observations about Donald Trump’s acceptance speech

Illustration--MC

It was with great reluctance that I watched Republican Party’s presidential nominee Donald J. Trump’s acceptance speech last night. My brain can no longer pick individual words in what he says but hear a cacophony of conflicting ideas mixed in a blender whose blade is so blunted by excessive and reckless use that it cannot even cut through butter. (Phew! That was one tiresome sentence. That’s how I feel.) Nevertheless, the journalist in me is not totally asleep and hence these few observations about what he said.

If I were to distil down his speech to one overarching phrase, it would be, “I alone can fix it.” Wait, he did indeed say precisely that in a garden variety case of messianic complex.

He said, “I have joined the political arena so that the powerful can no longer beat up on people who cannot defend themselves. Nobody knows the system better than me, which is why I alone can fix it.” Although he promised specifics in what he would do as president what he actually offered was a presidency on the fly. Never mind how and what I will do but I will do it seemed to be the approach.

TV news anchors were bracing for a lofty, presidential pivot from Trump that floated above the grimy fray that he himself has been creating for over a year now. Instead, they got pretty much the same vision only slightly better dressed. He cast himself as “the law and order candidate”, not just a law and order candidate but definite “the.” I do not know what that means in practical terms.

This is how he put it: “When I take the oath of office next year, I will restore law and order to our country. I will work with, and appoint, the best prosecutors and law enforcement officials in the country to get the job properly done. In this race for the White House, I am the law and order candidate. The irresponsible rhetoric of our president, who has used the pulpit of the presidency to divide us by race and color, has made America a more dangerous environment than frankly I have ever seen, or anybody in this room has ever watched or seen.” That from someone who began his presidential campaign by calling an entire people (with exception of some good ones) criminals and rapists.

The sense one got from hearing him was that most of America’s major ills, including its economic challenges and law and order problems, can be solved rather quickly if he is in the White House. For him, solving problems is only a simple matter of saying that he will solve those problems. Be it radical Islamic terrorism as represented by ISIS or trade deals everything will be solved by lunchtime on January 20, 2017. I exaggerate, of course, but that is the sense one gets.

This is what he said about ISIS and radical Islamic terrorism: “We must work with all of our allies who share our goal of destroying ISIS and stamping out Islamic terror. This includes working with our greatest ally in the region, the state of Israel. Lastly, we must immediately suspend immigration from any nation that has been compromised by terrorism until such time as proven vetting mechanisms have been put in place.”

It is just a question of working with allies and suspending immigration from countries “compromised by terrorism”. That is a pretty nebulous and broad policy prescription which can be seen to mean countries as wide ranging as France and India. What does “compromised by terrorism” mean? Does it mean countries which have been victims of terrorism? Or does it mean countries which have been victims of terrorism because their lax “vetting mechanisms” allowed refugees, some of whom could be harboring such antipathies? My suspicion is that Trump believes in improv presidency. Policy-making on the fly; do what it takes at a particular moment to get the deal done sort of thing.

No one was expecting a cohesively crafted and electrifying acceptance speech from a man who swings from idea to idea with a level of skill that would make Tarzan proud. The problem with this approach is that the hard, knotty vines that you leave behind in your wake get entangled.

Although I came to America barely 18 years ago I have never viewed this country from an immigrant’s standpoint. That has everything to do with my grounding in science generally and physics particularly. The lowest level I can operate on is cosmic. I do not quite get the angst of being an immigrant at all. Notwithstanding that approach one gets this feeling from any Republican engagement, particularly of the vociferously partisan kind that such a convention necessarily is, is that one is not particularly welcome. “You are here and that’s fine but don’t get in my way as I go about fixing things because I alone can fix it” is what is being implied.

Much is being made about the ease of immigrating to America by many Republicans. They live in a fantasy world where immigrating to America is a simple act of buying an airline ticket and and going to the nearest American mission to get a visa. Have they tried to immigrate themselves? If they had, they would have discovered how tedious and demanding the process is. It takes several years, sometimes even a decade or two.

CNN and other network anchors kept insisting that this was going to be the most important speech of his life. Listening to it gave one no such impression. He just put together some disjointed ideas and read it to a captive audience that couldn’t care less what he was saying as long he was saying something. Speaking of saying something that fit their partisan notions of reality, he said at one point that the detention of 10 American sailors by Tehran preceded the Iran nuclear deal. The simple chronological fact is that the sailors were detained on January 12, 2016 while the nuclear deal was secured on July 14, 2015. He had to reverse the order in order to imply that with US sailors on their knees at gunpoint the nuclear deal resulted. But then why must facts come in the way of a powerful partisan yarn?

I suppose I have made enough insightful points about a speech that I was reluctant to vote to begin with. Now if you do not mind, I have to get back to the more pressing issue of whether we live in a simulated universe. Can there be greater evidence of it than what I just wrote?

P.S. Trump often ends his sentences with “believe me”, especially when he makes grand promises. That is because he is trying to convince himself and because he says many unbelievable things.