'Tis that time of the year again when you want to send out pretty snaps of the happy family that you are - two and a half of you, that is. But things have been different since that cute thing that just wails and poops was born - tough to get one decent shot to send! That less-than-a-foot long human being with the attention span of an itching eyelid is one tough nut to deal with when taking a picture. Do not panic - this blog post shall enlighten your path to a picture perfect new year. Let us first reminisce about the old days and feel like grandpas...
In the golden days of yore, when it was just the two of you it was easy to get the perfect snap. She would lean over or shove her jaw forward at a particular angle, and you would tuck in your tummy and hold your breath. Then, she would smile to expose just the first and second molar of her teeth (the rest of her teeth make her look fat). Following which, you will realize that your tummy is not tucked in (the horror!). But you shall immediately put on a brave face and show your teeth as well; aaand kachinngg! The snap is taken. Another album with three hundred pictures of the same place from various angles for your family, woo hooo!
But now that drooling little imp with razor sharp claws is a whole different ball game. Even if you can get it to focus (sidenote: yes, "it" is the correct word here as per English grammar - neutral gender!)... so like I was saying... even if you can get your child to focus, you will have to be quick enough to capture that smile. Before those eyes wander, before those little arms start flailing and cover that pink face, you must hasten! By now, you must have realized the true import of the saying, "There is many a slip between the cup and the lip". Because, even if your kid was looking at the lens for a moment with intense focus and you rushed to click that snap in unconcealed glee, by the time you pressed that button and the camera focused and flash popped open and your hand became stable (all within a few nanoseconds), your kid was looking somewhere else when that snap finally happened! Hahahah - you know you should have got that high speed three thousand dollar camera instead of spending them on that expensive brand of baby diapers!
Enough with the problems, already! What are the solutions?! Hah... here come the secret tips. First, try the dancing-daddy trick. Nothing's more entertaining to a child than to see his parent flailing his arms wildly and making cloo clack clackety clack noises with snapping fingers and clapping palms. Of course we never doubted that you speak the child's secret boogaaboo language fluently; never mind the bewildered and mostly disinterested look on the child's face.
Next, try the point-at-object trick! For thousands of years, parents of all ages have striven in vain to make their children see exactly what they want them to see, or to even turn in a direction they would want their offspring to turn. You, sir, however, have found the secret recipe and therefore expect that if you look at your child straight in the eye and then point at the camera - you shall have the undivided attention of said child at whatever you desire. Like I said... beautiful trick known only to you!
Third, do not underestimate the power of the shiny iPhone trick! Of course those two hundred dollars you paid to get an iPhone are worthless compared to the priceless few moments when your sub-annual child shall grab the phone and throw it into the bowl of milk nearby to its untimely demise. And hey, if you are truly the chosen one, you will capture the blurred sling of your child's arm and a toothless gape with one long drool in motion!
Now, consider the baby-on-baby-action! Something magical always happens when two or more infants are put together very close to each other. Like the days of yore when zamindars would put their potential game-fighting cocks into a ring, you can decide to pit your kid and his razor sharp claws against another newborn human being and have fun while they try to scratch and tear out each others eyes. They are so cute together, aren't they?!
Finally, you can turn to the only foolproof method known since the dawn of time: the give-the-child-his-swallow-plastic trick. You see, this shiny object that the child is actually stretching his arms for is the one that is really going to work. You and I might know that his default reaction to anything he can grasp with his tiny fist is going into his mouth first. But hey, never let the child's safety come in the way of a cool picture! It works in two steps. One: hand him that penny, or the round ball of shredded thermocol, or the shiny bead lying around from the broken necklace. Step two: go hunt for the camera and get busy setting up the auto-flash while the child admires and swallows it. Oh what fun 'tis to ride to the emergency room on new year's eve!
Stay safe, people - and have a great, fulfilling and prosperous new year! :)
Monday, December 27, 2010
Saturday, December 18, 2010
The proof of divinity - II
This is the second part of the post by the same name. You can read part 1 here.
A common phrase we refer to in Hindi is, वो करे तो रासलीला, और हम करें तो करक्टर ढीला! The rough translation of this into English is, "When he (Lord Krishna) does it, you call it divine bliss; when I do it, you call me an immoral man". If you haven't already guessed from the tone of the idiom, it is generally presented as a defense by streetside romeos and others who make lecherous advances towards women. Why and how? Well, because Krishna stole the clothes of the naked Gopis bathing in the river and it is considered one of his great teachings. He had the right to do this - you and I don't. I am not going to go into that debate right now (some other time, perhaps - including some qualms I have about Rama and some other deities). But in a lot of other contexts, I find this inherent "He is divine therefore whatever he does is right" mentality confusing at best and hypocritical for the most part.
I have this objection against connoisseurs of modern art, to begin with. If you and I were to draw a single red straight line across a white canvas and call it art, we wouldn't be hailed as a visionary thinker, get invited to black tie parties and asked to deliver snooty lectures over expensive champaign. An established modern artist on the other hand, can walk in somewhere and do the same thing in five minutes and it will be hailed as the blood line dividing the haves and have-nots in society. If that be so, it is the brand name that is selling and not the art itself. The "divinity" of the artist in this case is apparently captured on canvas, and the painting will sell for crores of rupees and adore some wall somewhere where it will be worshipped. I dislike such art for this precise reason - when you want to, you can find meaning in almost anything! That shoe rack in your room is art, but someone wouldn't pay to see it. Place it in the middle of a large room with clean walls and nothing else; I repeat, nothing else; in the room - and people will pay good money to come see it.
When you see divinity in a person and not the idea, you are deluding yourself. Common everyday actions become legend: and we accept their actions to be the right way of doing things. "Did Mrs. MLA decide to stay for 5 more minutes until the last lecture was finished at the small school's sports day? Look how much she loves the people: we need such leaders!" "Did she walk away as soon as her lecture was done? Look how dedicated she is to her work: we need such leaders!"
We refuse to accept the fact that they too are human and their behaviour is going to be just like that of any other human being. The fact that she is already on that pedestal of divinity for us is always going to make us look up to her. Every single action of hers thereafter is simply going to be an additional proof of her divinity: we all then suffer from confirmation bias and will refuse to accept otherwise.
Don't assume that this is always a positive light, though. The same two examples from above about the MLA can also be interpreted by a sworn detractor as her political gimmick or a snobbish nature respectively. I am of course throwing the word "divinity" around here loosely. Poet's liberty, visionary, simplistic expressionist, religious fanatic or right wing extremist - throw up any word salad you want but my head will still be shouting, "Really? If his arch enemy did the same thing would I still be equally dreamy and fawning fan of the other guy?".
The conclusion, therefore, is to keep an open mind. We need to actively strive to be tolerant of other opinions and ideas, give the other guy a chance. And when in doubt, we must be ready to have an acid test of an idea/ideal we hold true. Let us not twist words to fit what we already know: or at least try not to do so. Active introspection is a great tool - it tells us about ourself and makes us ponder about the possibility that we may be wrong. And like they say, "Self realization is a bitch". :)
A common phrase we refer to in Hindi is, वो करे तो रासलीला, और हम करें तो करक्टर ढीला! The rough translation of this into English is, "When he (Lord Krishna) does it, you call it divine bliss; when I do it, you call me an immoral man". If you haven't already guessed from the tone of the idiom, it is generally presented as a defense by streetside romeos and others who make lecherous advances towards women. Why and how? Well, because Krishna stole the clothes of the naked Gopis bathing in the river and it is considered one of his great teachings. He had the right to do this - you and I don't. I am not going to go into that debate right now (some other time, perhaps - including some qualms I have about Rama and some other deities). But in a lot of other contexts, I find this inherent "He is divine therefore whatever he does is right" mentality confusing at best and hypocritical for the most part.
I have this objection against connoisseurs of modern art, to begin with. If you and I were to draw a single red straight line across a white canvas and call it art, we wouldn't be hailed as a visionary thinker, get invited to black tie parties and asked to deliver snooty lectures over expensive champaign. An established modern artist on the other hand, can walk in somewhere and do the same thing in five minutes and it will be hailed as the blood line dividing the haves and have-nots in society. If that be so, it is the brand name that is selling and not the art itself. The "divinity" of the artist in this case is apparently captured on canvas, and the painting will sell for crores of rupees and adore some wall somewhere where it will be worshipped. I dislike such art for this precise reason - when you want to, you can find meaning in almost anything! That shoe rack in your room is art, but someone wouldn't pay to see it. Place it in the middle of a large room with clean walls and nothing else; I repeat, nothing else; in the room - and people will pay good money to come see it.
When you see divinity in a person and not the idea, you are deluding yourself. Common everyday actions become legend: and we accept their actions to be the right way of doing things. "Did Mrs. MLA decide to stay for 5 more minutes until the last lecture was finished at the small school's sports day? Look how much she loves the people: we need such leaders!" "Did she walk away as soon as her lecture was done? Look how dedicated she is to her work: we need such leaders!"
We refuse to accept the fact that they too are human and their behaviour is going to be just like that of any other human being. The fact that she is already on that pedestal of divinity for us is always going to make us look up to her. Every single action of hers thereafter is simply going to be an additional proof of her divinity: we all then suffer from confirmation bias and will refuse to accept otherwise.
Don't assume that this is always a positive light, though. The same two examples from above about the MLA can also be interpreted by a sworn detractor as her political gimmick or a snobbish nature respectively. I am of course throwing the word "divinity" around here loosely. Poet's liberty, visionary, simplistic expressionist, religious fanatic or right wing extremist - throw up any word salad you want but my head will still be shouting, "Really? If his arch enemy did the same thing would I still be equally dreamy and fawning fan of the other guy?".
The conclusion, therefore, is to keep an open mind. We need to actively strive to be tolerant of other opinions and ideas, give the other guy a chance. And when in doubt, we must be ready to have an acid test of an idea/ideal we hold true. Let us not twist words to fit what we already know: or at least try not to do so. Active introspection is a great tool - it tells us about ourself and makes us ponder about the possibility that we may be wrong. And like they say, "Self realization is a bitch". :)
Saturday, December 11, 2010
The proof of divinity
Each one of us needs a hero. An idol, a point of reference, a larger brand identity about which we feel proud to call ourselves fanatics. You get to choose some of these for yourself. Like your favourite song, or your favourite author. For some things, however, the idol or larger identity is thrust upon us. Your religion, your nation, your sect, your football team - you don't really have a choice in these: you inherit them. And, unless you are fiercely independent in thought and had the conviction of your beliefs even during your adolescence, you have also picked up cultural icons simply because your peers believed in them. In a sum total therefore, we all have some larger identities who we simply "belong" to, or our lots are thrust in with them no matter what.
Any such idea or identity whose inception happened within us is usually a stronghold. We do not seek reassurances from outside that indeed our choice is good. Consider your favourite trip you have had so far in life. No contention, no pressure. It was purely yours, based on your own experience and judgement - and you will be able to defend it logically with someone who perhaps accompanied you on that or some other trip as well. You will have an opinion of your "own".
On the other hand, an idea or ideology which you were forced on to, or happened to be attached to by fortune, will always need defense by external means. "Defending" a perceived choice is achieved through a repertoire of facts which someone higher up the chain told you. I belonged to this camp once: fiercely arguing with anyone that I shouldn't (and neither should anyone else) watch any movies because they are inherently bad and cause the society to go astray [Yeah don't ask and I wouldn't tell]. The other form of defending is when you try to convince others actively into buying the same thing you did because of someone else's sales pitch. Remember trying to convince your friend to buy that same overpriced TV you bought because it came with "hyper-anti-aliasing"?
The last example brings us to the intent behind this post. Consider this: one of the greatest sources of adjectives and adulation about the king Harshavardhan who was defeated at the hands of Pulakesi II of the Chalukya dynasty, is ironically, from the annals of Pulakesi II himself. The court poet of Pulakesi II, Ravikirti, had his verses etched in stone on the walls of the Jain temple of Aihole [source]. How did the court poet of the victor end up lavishing praise upon the defeated? The answer: "Look how great our king is... he defeated this other king who was sooooooo powerful".
I therefore consider my friend's mother foolish whenever she starts touting her husband's ability to lift a bicycle up with just his pinkie. The fact that she is so eager to tell everyone about it is the disgusting bit. People who swear by their film star because he can flip a cigarette, or people whose idols can mouth meaningless nothings and still inspire awe - I pity them, because perhaps they don't really believe in their idol. If this is the proof of your hero's divinity, then you are being scammed - whether you accept it or not. Run, every time someone tries to sell something or someone desperately to you. It is a scam. Put your idol to the test, hold their feet to the fire before you believe in their ideas.
To end this post, I quote from Swami Vivekananda, my idol: "Let none regret that they were difficult to convince. I fought my Master (Sri Ramakrishna) for six long years, with the result that I know every inch of the way. Every inch of the way".
Any such idea or identity whose inception happened within us is usually a stronghold. We do not seek reassurances from outside that indeed our choice is good. Consider your favourite trip you have had so far in life. No contention, no pressure. It was purely yours, based on your own experience and judgement - and you will be able to defend it logically with someone who perhaps accompanied you on that or some other trip as well. You will have an opinion of your "own".
On the other hand, an idea or ideology which you were forced on to, or happened to be attached to by fortune, will always need defense by external means. "Defending" a perceived choice is achieved through a repertoire of facts which someone higher up the chain told you. I belonged to this camp once: fiercely arguing with anyone that I shouldn't (and neither should anyone else) watch any movies because they are inherently bad and cause the society to go astray [Yeah don't ask and I wouldn't tell]. The other form of defending is when you try to convince others actively into buying the same thing you did because of someone else's sales pitch. Remember trying to convince your friend to buy that same overpriced TV you bought because it came with "hyper-anti-aliasing"?
The last example brings us to the intent behind this post. Consider this: one of the greatest sources of adjectives and adulation about the king Harshavardhan who was defeated at the hands of Pulakesi II of the Chalukya dynasty, is ironically, from the annals of Pulakesi II himself. The court poet of Pulakesi II, Ravikirti, had his verses etched in stone on the walls of the Jain temple of Aihole [source]. How did the court poet of the victor end up lavishing praise upon the defeated? The answer: "Look how great our king is... he defeated this other king who was sooooooo powerful".
I therefore consider my friend's mother foolish whenever she starts touting her husband's ability to lift a bicycle up with just his pinkie. The fact that she is so eager to tell everyone about it is the disgusting bit. People who swear by their film star because he can flip a cigarette, or people whose idols can mouth meaningless nothings and still inspire awe - I pity them, because perhaps they don't really believe in their idol. If this is the proof of your hero's divinity, then you are being scammed - whether you accept it or not. Run, every time someone tries to sell something or someone desperately to you. It is a scam. Put your idol to the test, hold their feet to the fire before you believe in their ideas.
To end this post, I quote from Swami Vivekananda, my idol: "Let none regret that they were difficult to convince. I fought my Master (Sri Ramakrishna) for six long years, with the result that I know every inch of the way. Every inch of the way".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
