Where I'm Calling FromA strik­ing fea­ture of the Lord of the Rings books is the author’s vivid ren­der­ing of Mid­dle Earth. J.R.R Tolkien chose an imag­i­nary set­ting for his books, but he pro­vided his read­ers so much infor­ma­tion about them – maps, his­tor­i­cal con­texts, evoca­tive descrip­tions of land­scapes — that it was hard to believe that the whole thing was made up. Tolkien filled his books with an over­whelm­ing amount of descrip­tive detail at every oppor­tu­nity he could, cre­at­ing an array of detailed snap­shots of the set­ting for read­ers. The effect was some­thing unusual – a cred­i­ble fantasy.

Styl­is­ti­cally, there couldn’t be a writer far­ther away from Tolkien than Ray­mond Carver. Where Tolkien would use a hun­dred words, Carver uses ten; where Tolkien’s char­ac­ters wax poetic, Carver’s just grunt. Tolkien took pride in the length (and breadth) of his works, Carver was a min­i­mal­ist from the Hem­ing­way school.

But after read­ing Where I’m Call­ing From, Carver’s last col­lec­tion of short sto­ries before his pre­ma­ture death, one can’t help feel­ing that Carver did to the human being what Tolkien did to Mid­dle Earth — his sto­ries are a series of sil­hou­ettes that spot­light the world of his sub­jects. Like Tolkien’s ver­bose snap­shots, the sil­hou­ettes work rather well. No writer I’ve read comes close to cap­tur­ing the tex­tured world of the guy next door as well as Carver does here.

Carver’s most remark­able achieve­ment is the gen­uine­ness of his char­ac­ters. A few sen­tences into every story a famil­iar­ity envelops you – you’ve met these peo­ple, you know how they talk – fol­lowed by awe at how true it all sounds. The dad in Bicy­cles, Mus­cles, Cig­a­rettes could’ve so eas­ily been mine; the odd cou­ple in Put your­self in My Shoes could’ve been the weird peo­ple next door that maids hated to work for.

The whole expe­ri­ence of read­ing a Carver book is mind-blowing – it is like watch­ing events unfold at your neighbor’s house through a sky­light. And it is here that the author’s spare style comes in so handy – Carver keeps his descrip­tions down to a min­i­mum, let­ting the reader’s imag­i­na­tion fill in the back­drop: these peo­ple could be your neigh­bors as much as they are mine.

A lot has been writ­ten about Carver’s min­i­mal­ist style, but while his writ­ing is spare and stark, he has an amaz­ing eye for just the right details – pass­ing men­tions of an odd stray dog, a wet shoe or daddy’s mus­cles some­how lend a more com­plete feel to the sto­ries, and the over­all effect is that of some­thing way more than the sum of its parts. (I so want to pun on his spare sen­tence con­struc­tion and him not spar­ing a detail, but I’ll pass).

In “What’s in Alaska,” for exam­ple, two cou­ples get together for an evening. And as the evening pro­gresses, laced with drink­ing and drugs, Carver chooses to focus a lot of atten­tion on the brand new shoes of one of the men – his doubts about the shoes seem to some­how mir­ror how he feels about the changes in his life. It is totally unex­pected, and incred­i­bly poignant.

Mid­way through the book, there seems to be a slight shift in Carver’s style. He’s a lit­tle more chatty, and the tales have a sun­nier feel to them. You could sense a writer try­ing to break free from a style that was start­ing to cramp him, but unfor­tu­nately for Carver (and us) his life ended before he could fin­ish his experimentation.

Accord­ing to this essay by William Stull, pro­fes­sor at the Uni­ver­sity of Hart­ford, some­time after the pub­li­ca­tion of What We Talk About When We Talk About Love Carver thought he would hit a dead end if he con­tin­ued to head down the path of increased min­i­mal­ism, and

[…]what fol­lowed over the next two years was an artis­tic turn­about, “an open­ing up” dur­ing which he restored and expanded the work he had pared down under the influ­ence of edi­tor Lish, Hemingway’s “the­ory of omis­sion,” and his own purga­tive impulses. Two small-press books, Fires and If It Please You, dis­play the out­come of this process. In addi­tion, Carver wrote a dozen new sto­ries in a higher, more hope­ful key. The first of them, “Cathe­dral” (Atlantic Monthly, Sep­tem­ber 1981), he termed “totally dif­fer­ent in con­cep­tion and exe­cu­tion” from his pre­vi­ous work.

Truth, I’m sure you’ve heard, is stranger than fic­tion. If you believe that, then Carver’s short sto­ries are the clos­est fic­tion can get to the truth.

Update: Here’s Fal­staff on Carver. Neat.

 

Gra­ham Greene, we hear, sucked at spelling. And so, when play­ing Scrab­ble, he resorted to the clas­sic poor speller’s trick: quoign­ing new words.

The prob­lem, accord­ing to Meyer, was that [Gra­ham] Greene’s spelling was “deeply dubi­ous”, and the pair did not have a dic­tio­nary. Dur­ing a stay in Tahiti, Greene pro­duced the words “zeb”, which he claimed was an Eliz­a­bethan word for “cock”, and “quoign” which he insisted was Shake­spearean, quot­ing: “Yon castle’s quoign that Duncan’s spirit haunts.”

Meyer thought the line was as dubi­ous as Greene’s spelling and, in the sul­try Tahit­ian nights, tem­pers frayed. The pair were still argu­ing when they reached San Fran­cisco, months later. They ran straight from the ship to a second-hand book store and found a dictionary.

The word was in, spelled “quoin”, which sat­is­fied Greene, though as Meyer pointed out, “quoin” would not have landed on a triple let­ter score.

I don’t feel so bad now for trick­ing my eleven year old nephew into believ­ing that qyon­der was the one of the few words in Eng­lish where a u didn’t fol­low the q. Think it meant a prob­lem at a dis­tant place. I hope he men­tions me in his auto­bi­og­ra­phy, but given that he hasn’t both­ered to look up qyon­der yet, that is a very dis­tant pos­si­bil­ity. He isn’t that good at cricket either.

Mr Greene and Scrab­ble (Through Book­slut)

Mean­while, every­one else in the world seems to have watched the new Pot­ter movie. I want to go watch it tomor­row, so that I can tell peo­ple that the book was so much bet­ter than the movie. To make that state­ment with author­ity, I had to read the book first, so I read it online here — check back next week for the post that tells you the book is so much bet­ter than the movie.

The Guardian Digested Read is my (very belated) find of the year.

Why, I even read the entire dirty book that Fal­staff talks about so much. In five min­utes, no less. Let’s see you beat that buddy.

And before I sign off, check out Gayathri’s crisp lit­tle review of Harold Pinter’s A Birth­day Party. And wish the soon to be mar­ri­a­jed (damn, that’s bet­ter than qyon­der) Veena. To bal­ance out the sexes, here’s another bad speller exposed.

Update: Some­how, this post would like to think it spawned this one. It feels rather proud about the fact.

It is as if we are too pug-nosed indi­vid­u­ally, but together, we cre­ate a patri­cian nose a Roman would be proud of. And from atop that noble pro­boscis, we gaze down upon the world. For all our toils for the sake of being included, exclu­sion is the ulti­mate reward.

 

I have been unable to sleep over the last few days. While mean peo­ple might think it is just jet­lag, the truth couldn’t be far­ther away. The truth is, I can’t sleep because I am wor­ried. Very worried.

Blog­ging seems to be an activ­ity with a very lim­ited life­time, and quite a few peo­ple are retir­ing rather early. Burnt out, bored, tired, what­ever. As I toss and turn, I know that some day in the future, I will have to call it a day. And when I do, what would I leave behind? What will I be remem­bered for?

You see, dear reader, I am wor­ried about my legacy. I am also slightly con­cerned about doz­ing off at work tomor­row, but let’s set that aside for a minute and talk about my legacy.

After giv­ing it a lot of thought (three nights, no sleep) I think I have fig­ured out what I need to do — I need to trans­fer my con­sid­er­able knowl­edge of almost every­thing under the sun (except Konkani clas­si­cal music) to peo­ple. After some more thought (one night, no sleep) I have decided that the best place for me to start this process would be movies.

Bad angle, no teardropAs I write this, visions of numero­log­i­cally cor­rect movie titles that say “Thanks to Stochhas­tic­cca” or “A Klas­sic Kon­cieved at Karthik’s Blag” cloud my mind. Maybe some­one from Hollywood’ll pick up these lessons, and when she wins an Oscar she’ll say “I owe it all to Karthik”, as tear drops roll down her cheeks, fall on her neck and con­tinue on down­wards. Nice. Why did I not think of this earlier?

I will sleep a lit­tle and then come back and start off with the first les­son in the Sto­chas­tica Sinema School Series.

__________________________________________________

Please, these are not the tears I meantI am up now, and visions of that lonely tear drop still linger. Tempt­ing as it is to start off with the act­ing school for women, I will self­lessly start off the first les­son with tips on writ­ing good punch lines for Indian movies.

But the truth is, if you don’t know how to write good punch lines, you will never make it big as a screen­writer in any lan­guage but Hindi. To be suc­cess­ful in Hindi, screen­writ­ers need to make it big in Hol­ly­wood first. And oh, before I for­get, the act­ing school for women will meet next week, soon after I get my haircut.

Let’s start with a question.

A fat man is beat­ing up fit peo­ple. Unable to bear the over­pow­er­ing strength of his flab, the fit guys have no option but to try and elec­tro­cute the fat man. But he is stronger than that, so the moment the wires touch him, the power sta­tion that gen­er­ated the elec­tric­ity that dared approach the fat man explodes. Spectacularly.

The fat man turns to the fit guys, and tells them, “Don’t be shocked! I can shock elec­tric­ity!” He then swishes his hands, turns around and walks away in slow motion — the cam­era focus­ing on his fat ass. [Navin, you know now.]

What did he just do?

Answer, stu­dents, is that he just mouthed a punch line.

A punch line, to start off with a for­mal def­i­n­i­tion is:

1. A pithy piece of gib­ber­ish.
2. Spo­ken by mostly fat men in lead roles, but there are excep­tions.
3. The point of which is to (appear to) high­light the virtues of the speaker.
4. The speaker of the line is the sub­ject. (In other words, fat man on himself).

Another exam­ple of a punch line would be:

If you try to touch a woman when George is around, George will turn into a man and turn you into a woman.”

Notice that George is the speaker, and the sub­text of the sen­tence is that George would cas­trate the toucher. This tech­nique of refer­ring to one­self by one’s first name is quite pop­u­lar and is employed in every other punch line. It is some­thing you should file away for future use.

We will close this part of the les­son with a few more exam­ples. Please try writ­ing some more at home, and test them out by say­ing them out loud in crowded places. If you get into trou­ble, sue me, please.

When­ever peo­ple are in need, I help them. I can’t help doing this.

God might for­give you for this sin, but I will never for­give you. May God for­give me.

A type of punch line that is less fre­quently used is the pithy sen­tence about noth­ing. These are mostly spo­ken by the hero to a skimpily clad girl. After this sen­tence is spo­ken, the girl usu­ally falls in love with the hero.

For a woman, not wear­ing mini-skirts is the only way to skirt trouble.

If you wear a dress with a plung­ing neck­line
On you bad men will want to recline.
On them lies no blame,
for you have no shame.

.

The amount of trou­ble you invite is inversely pro­por­tional to the amount of clothes you wear.

This is only for classy movies, I think. Will work in A centers.

If your blouse is always cut high
and you act shy (by low­er­ing your eye)
no man will open his fly
this is not a lie.

This one is poetic, so please email me before using this in your movie.

After the girl falls in love, she will pro­ceed to dance with the hero on the alps, clad in a bikini. It is quite impor­tant to not have your lead­ing man speak any punch lines now.

We are almost at the end of our les­son, folks. The last type of punch line is sim­i­lar to the first type, except that some lead­ing men don’t feel com­fort­able talk­ing about them­selves all the time. In such cases, we have a come­dian mouth the line and this gives us the lat­i­tude to make it even more outrageous.

Lo and Behold!
Brother will turn sand into gold;
the young into old;
He will never be sold.

If you make women cry,
Brother will take a pan
put you in there and fry
you until you turn tan.

Nice obser­va­tion, stu­dent num­ber 1. Yes, indeed, a come­dian should always call the hero brother.

And that, ladies and gen­tle­men, is the end of Sto­chas­tica Sinema School Les­son #1.

__________________________________________________

Before you leave, remem­ber this: I am an elec­tri­cal fire. Even water can­not touch me. Let me go back to sleep now.

 

Inspi­ra­tions for books can come from the most unex­pected of sources — from the obvi­ous in your face inci­dent to tan­gen­tial, barely related hap­pen­ings that spark trains of thought that lead to nov­els. Nabokov’s Lolita appar­ently “was some­how prompted by a news­pa­per story about an ape in the Jardin des Plantes who, after months of coax­ing by a sci­en­tist, pro­duced the first draw­ing ever char­coaled by an ani­mal: this sketch showed the bars of the poor creature’s cage.”

Muses lurk every­where. In the right hands, apes with char­coal in their hands can become seductresses.

In the case of “Sujatha” Ran­gara­jan, one does not need to look too hard to find out where the muse lurked: His typ­i­cal mid­dle class Brah­min upbring­ing — a unique mix of con­ser­v­a­tive and lib­eral extremes, a steady diet of Dahl, O.Henry and Carver, an engi­neer­ing edu­ca­tion, and an inter­est in sci­ence fiction.

Draw­ing themes from the milieu he was most com­fort­able and using a lot of tech­niques bor­rrowed from the mas­ters — mostly Dahl methinks — Sujatha devel­oped a suc­cess­ful for­mula early in his career. A matter-of-fact prose style with a lot of irony thrown in helped make him immensely pop­u­lar, and that pop­u­lar­ity per­sists to date.

At sev­enty, he is pro­lific as ever — sup­ple­ment­ing reg­u­lar columns in sev­eral mag­a­zines with the occa­sional work of fic­tion. If you allude about his pop­u­lar­ity to Sujatha, he will bris­tle. He is con­vinced that the whole pop­u­lar tag is a con­spir­acy to belit­tle his lit­er­ary achieve­ments, and says as much in his intro­duc­tion to “Sujatha’s Selected Short Sto­ries”, a two-volume col­lec­tion of a hun­dred and some­thing of his best short stories.

But the truth is, after the ini­tial cre­ative burst that helped him break into the league of very pop­u­lar writ­ers, Sujatha stag­nated; he was reduced to churn­ing out story after story using the same for­mula. And I don’t blame him for it — an envi­ron­ment where your name guar­an­tees instant com­mer­cial suc­cess is not really con­ducive to self improve­ment. He also alludes in the intro­duc­tion to the pres­sures of work­ing with dead­lines affect­ing the qual­ity of his stories.

The best evi­dence of this stag­na­tion is this anthol­ogy — after the refresh­ing effect of the first few sto­ries ennui sets in. It is not that the qual­ity of the later works is bad — no mat­ter where you start in the book, the repet­i­tive nature of the sto­ries in the anthol­ogy becomes evi­dent after the first few sto­ries. It’s all the same after some time: The wry first per­son nar­ra­tives (always male, almost the author), the bold (for those days) descrip­tions of women, the twists at the end, the slightly macabre plots and the upper mid­dle class setting.

This is not to say I didn’t like the book: taken one at a time, most of the sto­ries in the anthol­ogy are com­pe­tent, and a hand­ful of them are out­stand­ing. Sujatha’s use of irony is espe­cially good — in one my favorite sto­ries, a fam­ily dis­cov­ers a bag filled with money at their doorstep. Scared, they want to go hand the bag over to the cops, but the hus­band real­izes he has no money to hire an autorick­shaw to go to the police sta­tion. He sends his wife off to bor­row some money from the neighbors.

If the books had been whit­tled down to about twenty of his best sto­ries, this would have been a col­lec­tion to trea­sure. As it stands though, the books are a lit­tle too long, and a lit­tle too repet­i­tive. Do buy them both, but don’t read them in one shot — take your time, and read a lot of other authors in between.

PS: I have to men­tion this — the pro­duc­tion qual­ity of the books is awe­some. Uyir­mai Pad­hip­pagam has done a great job — typo-free hard­cov­ers at this price are very cool.

Cross-posted on teakada.

 

Vijay, the heroI have been called a DUMD ASS(sic) on this very blog by an irate com­men­tor that thought I was being snotty when talk­ing about Indian movies. Now to be hon­est with you, one part of my brain would like me to think the com­men­tor was a nubile young lady who had very, very strong feel­ings for me. But y’all know this quite well: I am a real­ist and such balder­dash can­not delude me that eas­ily. I will read­ily con­cede that her feel­ings for me weren’t very, very strong.

So any­ways, in def­er­ence to my secret (but not very strong) admirer, I will restrict myself to a strictly objec­tive, fac­tual reportage about this movie called Sivakasi. It is in Tamil, and it stars an actor called Vijay. What? Ok, sure. I will defer to the spirit of this report (objec­tive, fac­tual) and revise the last sen­tence. It is in Tamil, and it stars a per­son called Vijay.

Close Shaves:

A group of peo­ple headed by a guy called Palan­quin Pandi sur­round another group of peo­ple. After a series of scuf­fles, Palan­quin Pandi’s group reveals their motive — they want to know who heads the other group of peo­ple. “Fairly easy ques­tion,” I thought to myself. Reg­u­lar movie watch­ers know what would hap­pen next: The hero will come up to Palan­quin and punch him a few times, and then look at the cam­era­man and inform him that he heads the group, and owns their hearts. Cue a song.

Now imag­ine my hor­ror when the scene unfolded dif­fer­ently — some­one that did not look like Vijay at all duly stepped for­ward, applied gen­er­ous amounts of ash on his head and moved his hands up and down. “This guy, hero?”, “Oh no!”, “What the ..” were the thoughts that ran through my mind. The guy then used sev­eral long sen­tences and clever place­ment of a title card to inform the cam­era­man that the hero was wise and strong and that he was the direc­tor of the movie. I am not sure Palan­quin got the point, but I heaved a sigh of relief. Phew.

What hap­pens to the losers on Jeopardy?

Dad A com­plains to Dad B that Dad B’s son tried to rape his daugh­ter. Dad B is very angry, and tries to beat up his son with a stout object. After a cou­ple of blows that didn’t land that well, Dad B asks his son if he is indeed his son. The bemused son asks the dad to check with his mom. Unable to stand this ques­tion, dad promptly dies. Hard ques­tions can kill.

What a total waist?

Music Direc­tor Srikanth Deva in a cameo appear­ance shakes his enor­mous waist to the beats of Maama Un Pon­nai Kodu, an old Illa­yaraja number.

Actress Nayan­thara in a cameo appear­ance shakes her enor­mous waist to the beats of a song I can’t remem­ber. Com­ing to think of it, I am not even sure it was a song, but the waist was enor­mous. She is now a cabalite.

Best Song in the Movie:

Music Direc­tor Srikanth Deva in a cameo appear­ance shakes his enor­mous waist to the beats of Maama Un Pon­nai Kodu, an old Illa­yaraja number.

The rap-like song (wanna, shake it, s to the i to the blah) that plays in the back­ground. Music can be mirth­ful too.

Movies can edu­cate too:

A male human being is defined as some­one that:

a. Falls in Love with a girl.
b. Mar­ries the girl.
c. Sleeps with the girl.

Any change in the order of events is not accept­able. What will hap­pen to such peo­ple though? I want to ask some­one, but I am afraid it might be a hard question.

Chicks will dig this:

Sev­eral (male) actors show off their thighs dur­ing fight sequences. I even detected a glimpse (or three) of under­gar­ments. Sorry, no thongs though.

Biggest expense item:

The amount of ash pur­chased for the movie. The good guys show their good­ness by apply­ing gen­er­ous amounts of it on their foreheads.

Sec­ond biggest expense item:

The amount of kum-kum pur­chased for the movie. The good guys show their good­ness by apply­ing gen­er­ous amounts of it on their foreheads.

Dia­logues heard the most:

Start the car!”

Beat that guy!”

Decrease most noticeable:

Quan­tity of clothes worn by Asin over the last few movies.

Increase most noticeable:

The num­ber of times Vijay speaks to the cam­era­man. They must be close friends.

Opti­mism:

Majaa will be bet­ter. Surely.

Impos­si­ble:

The opin­ion of my dad — reli­able critic, born, brought up and liv­ing in India still. Both movies are bad, Majaa is a tad worse. Such depths exist?

Cross-posted on teakada.

 

Wake up, will ya?”

I am not sleeping.”

Oh yeah? That’s good to know. So are you dead then?”

Do I look dead to you?”

I see that sar­casm goes right over your head. Let me ask you this then: what the heck have you been up to? Am I not in your scheme of things anymore?”

Hmm… I trav­eled half way around the world, and saw my home­town rav­aged by a freak storm. Trees down. Traf­fic lights out. Peo­ple with­out power, homes with­out roofs. The trees espe­cially, what a waste.”

Oh, I see. Very sad. But how come you’re grin­ning now?”

Coz I called my den­tist, and his voice mail said some­thing funny.”

What?”

Due to the hur­ri­cane last week (it said) our voice mail sys­tem was down, so we didn’t get all of your mes­sages. We all know how hard this can be. But stay strong, and together we’ll get through this adver­sity. Thank you for calling.”

Why is that funny again?”

God, you are worse than me. But then that’s why you are in my scheme of things, you make me feel good.”

© 2012 etcetera Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha

Switch to our mobile site