When does the 'learning' really happen?

Something I have been dreading for quite a while has finally come to pass.
My sibling has made the announcement most families prefer not to hear..."I have made my choice and this is who I want to marry".
Althought not such a big deal as it once was, it didnt even prove as big a deal as I thought it would be! It turns out, all those nights of bad dreams and restlessness and worries about how my parents would react have essentially come to a naught. Nothing overtly emotional has happened and from the looks of it, things will work out just fine. Of course it will not be ideal but the relief from not having to see the worse is far far greater than conditions being less than perfect [does that even happen?].

Hasnt everybody heard somewhere, sometime that things are never as bad as they seem? The lesson is literal there and simple to follow right? But how many times have I held on to it or even remembered it and not shrunk from facing a situation only because of the webs of entanglement that I kept weaving in my mind? Never. Not once that I can recall. What in fact I can recollect is a long list of episodes where I consistently avoided a situation however inevitable by letting myself be overwhelmed with fear of the worst. The counter-party list that I can also summon is that of sheer nothingness that actually resulted when I did in the end stand up to the circumstances. There is yet another corresponding list where I have reminded myself and sternly so at times that I need to realise that the worse as a matter of fact mostly resides in my mind and not in reality.

So is this then a matter of slow learning on my part? Or a refusal to learn an oft realised lesson?
Or simply that I as a person lack fortitude....the courage of conviction?

Well, if you look at it that way!

I am a convent school product. In India and especially in my age this mostly meant you were instructed and were expected to command over "Queen's" english; UK english if you will. There was no cable and not much infusion of north american television or movies in our lives to know untill quite late that the world knew another way of using english as a language. That there was a websters to the wren & martin. All these years later I still have a problem with swallowing non-UK grammer and spellings. The s-to-z conversions still jar me!

 I have had in fact a lot of problems with the sounds that grate my sense of what correct grammer should be. It took me a while to get comfortable with texting what with all the abbrs and intializn. I am aware that how much ever I think I've gotten 'footloose' Iam still medival in that sphere!
I have a thing against rap and hip hop too. I dont understand it most times and even if I do, I dont always appreciate it [leave aside eminem for now]. My thoughts are immediately drawn towards 'kids listen to this kind of stuff; the music has influence and on kids at a very impressionable age; among other things it promotes, this is awful language!' And then when I hear things like "whys you gatta sit here?" to my request to a young one to take her feet off from top of my seat, I feel somwhat vindicated. Justification for my sense of pall for where is the language going also comes to me in bits and pieces when I overhear conversations in everyday life on the train, in the coffee shop, bus stand, etc

 Of course this could be just an "A-G-E" thing. But humour me, I am goin somewhere else with this. 

 I've always been fascinated with Shakespeare. Never really had a chance to study literature although I would have loved to. The DIY method of studying isnt as easy as it may seem. The language to put it mildly, needs efforts to understand. Its not an easy read.
My fondness for literature not being restricted to the english language, I am also an eager learner for Indian literature. The classic texts like the Geeta, Gyaneshwari being part of this personal quest as much as the yearning to know the substance of the vedas. Again, none of these ['ask aaenyyybody!'] are easy reading for a DIY project.
Another patch of passion: movies. I love movies and esp old movies the black and white kind. All and any language - providing there are subtitles! But the ones I can uderstand on my own without help are also not as lucid because the language isnt what is spoken today.

 Easy to decipher then that language evolves?  Is in constant process of evolution? Fair also to assume that literature and entertainment are important contributors to this process?
Can I then conclude that what I hear in the songs today and on the streets and in movies will influence the development of what will come tommorow? That for example shoulda, woulda, coulda will be proper words of choice? That if you liked it, then you shoulda put a ring on it would be obvious? 

 More importantly - if I find yesterdays' difficult to understand and tommorow's uncomfortable to be with, then am "I" the lost one? 

Its a worry

I have recently discovered the hidden [from me] world of internet cinema. And as a result have been delighfully hooked on new marathi movies. Delighted not so much that I can watch movies now and keep up with new releases but more excited about the kind of movies I am able to watch.
I belong to the generation that actually looked forward to watching the saturday night marathi and sunday, hindi movies on Doordarshan. The marathi movies then were of substance in the sense that there was a storyline, credible acting and believeable and 'can realte to' kind of portrayals. As we grew up and the weekend offering dried up, so also the interest in watching these movies. The disinterest is attributable to a lot of factors including a fair amount of ' vernacular snub' developed in school but on reflection the movies got ridiculous as well. Slapstick and loud just wasnt attractive enough when the likes of  Stallone and Jackie Chang were available on VCR rentals!
Now I find myself falling in love all over again with marathi cinema. Its a great feeling! Of course nostalgia is always an ingredient when "again" is involved. And it makes me so happy to see the content of movies, the attempts at storytelling and the efforts of actors out to connect with audiences with credible talking points. In the past year I have seen movies address/recognize/highlight various issues for example, public attitudes towards health disorders like leucoderma, downs syndrome, schizophrenia; social issues like farmer suicides, sarva shiksha abhiyan [education for all campaign], abandoned-for-a-younger-woman, children of divorced parents, social image of a teacher-student realtionships etc
The attempts to present these issues are visibly sincere. Whats more the movies although not exactly rolling in hype and publicity enlist almost entirely an A-list star cast. And in many instances have these top artists in the marathi industry also contribute in pre and/or post production like script, story, songs/poetry, production, direction and such.

Now while I am getting all warm and fuzzy about this there comes creeping in my mind a worry. Will our generation be the last taking such pride? What I mean by our generation is the ones who left home for lives abroad and may go back but certainly will not see our kids brought up the way we were. Installing any feelings let alone love or even attachment for the mother tongue in our kids is a topic of  never ending discussion in the expatriate populations, has been for generations I am sure. But I am concerned about mine and thereby the first generation foreign born. While on one hand I concede to the 'this isnt my first language and I dont want to make efforts to know' argument of the born-outside-generation on the other hand [try and keep the economist from popping up!] I now really share the pangs of anxiety and in some part the agony of realising that everything we hold dear about this complex emotion may be lost!
Ours is then effectivly the last generation to appreciate and be thrilled by the joy of such things as even a rejuvenated regional cinema!!

History is written by the ...who?

" History is written by victors" - Churchhill
[or to be politically correct, "attributed to Winston Churchill, but of unknown origin."]
 Heard it for the first time during the school years, and then recognized it at various times in magazines, books, newspaper atricles, etc..



Recently, two events have given me reason to ponder over it. In no partrticular oder;
1] National Public Radio did a interview with a panel over the upcoming and much hyped HBO mini-series, The Pacific. Based on true accounts, the story focuses on 3 US Marines and their fellows from their first battle with the Japanese upto their triumphant return. Sounds predictable right? Wrong. What I heard was the story of the moral fight, the battles with conscience and the loss of humanity that dogged the marines. How by the time the war came to an end there was general dispair over fellow soldiers turning into cold killing machines. The series also depicts the public attitudes towards the soldiers; Japan and back home. 
All in all this is not what one would think about when thinking about the pacific theater during the WWII. America was on the wining side, they then were the writers of history right? And heroes from the winning side are brave, strong willed, and courageous, right? Not vulnerable, afraid, and later as the war progressed inhuman and their soul in tatters!


2] The 2009 elections in Iran. The incumbent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad won 62% of the votes cast. The world and grandmother followed the drama that followed the result declaration. The world and grandmother sympathised with the protestors and were appalled by scenes and stories of repression and oppression. The news arena was abuzz with stories from Iranians who had won over the world sentiment and were crying out that they had in fact won the elections and the Ahmedinejad regime has lost.  That was June 2009 and it is now the end of 2010's first quarter, and the result still stands, Ahmadinejad is the current president of the IRI.
He won and he stays. But look up the elections and you will not find it that straight forward.


Is the new media responsible for changing the adage? With social networks enabling ordinary folks to create and dissipate news [that effects them..or not!] the lines between the winers and losers have become blured; now anyone can write [history/commentary] irrespective of which side of the - now blurred than ever- line one is on; has the information age really and truly revolutionised the appetite for information and knowledge [general in this context]?


While I had immersed myself in thinking that history writing in the now digital age and info age will be more representative of all parties to a conflict, that power coming from winning will not be the sole hand that writes history, I come across this book review:
Let Our Fame Be Great: Journeys Among the Defiant People of the Caucasus. By Oliver Bullough.
Allen Lane; 496 pages [Not released yet]
To quote the essence of what stirred me " One of Mr Bullough’s most powerful points is how little about the Circassians can be found even in works by specialist historians of the region."


Not quite there yet...