I've been attracting a lot of Japanese spam on this post here - taking the comment count to a whopping 61 (and increasing by the day).

Obviously, when people try to sending me a message with such alarm, one is curious to know what the message is. In such cases, one uses Yahoo! Babelfish.

Sample translations:

"The price checker of the life who can diagnose present life experience! As for experience abundant your life being one no point? If you do with everyone, super it is pleasant, also the entertainment people doing, price check of [ru] life! You bodily sensation will try doing the price checker of the life who is spreading with the television and word-of-mouth communication"

My life is price-controlled.

"Young the wife of the world which is called [serebu] is hungry to the man, especially position disturbing, because the encounter unexpected is little, everyday you buy the man to always stress emission via the SEX circle and search. Here is the word-of-mouth communication sight of their business"

There's too much word-of-mouth happening, no?

"It doesn't try diagnosing the price of life? You diagnosing your own value, price your life annual income, as a human becomes the nudity. Challenging in the friend, and simultaneous it will deepen the bond."

Human becomes a nudity. Deep.

The Delhi High Court on Sex

Continuing this search, I came across Justice Sikri of the Delhi High Court, in a case relating to intellectual property and viagra, Pfizer Products v. B.L. Company and others (2002 (25) PTC 262 (Del)).

Nobody can match Krishna Iyer for sheer hilarity, but this still is quite something. The opening lines of the judgment are:

"Sex is an inescapable part of us. It is there from the moment of birth when we are given a sexual identity - boy or girl - and it is with us until the day we die - when it goes on the death certificate."

Innocuous enough, even if the logic is a bit stretched. (As in, what goes on the death certificate?) Then, comes the real meat:

Ever since Adam and Eve ate forbidden apple and were transported to earth, sex has become basic human instinct. Among other creatures copulation may be only a biological act - for procreation. However, for human beings, sexual intercourse is not only procreative. It is creative as well. It has been described as "the greatest driving force in the living world".

No wonder then, that much is written about it. From time immemorial. On how to enjoy it most. On how to continue to enjoy and be sexually active even at advanced stage of life. Vatsyayana's 'Kamasutra' has placed him among the immortals and no better elegy or eulogy can be written than the following lines:

"So long as lips shall kiss and eyes shall see. So long lives This, and This gives life to Thee".

So, it's all Adam and Eve's fault. Skip a couple of paragraphs to find this:

Sex may be most confusing, disappointing and lonely experience. It may also be most piercingly beautiful, earthshaking and companionable experience. It is the experience of latter kind, which human beings cherish.

Adapting someone else's joke - as far as confusing and disappointing experiences go, sex ranks quite high. Further:

Knowing this insatiable appetite of human kind, medical science - traditional and modern - has not lagged behind. Aphrodisiacs are "discovered" and "invented" for prolonged and enhanced sexual encounters. Various therapies are administered for treatment of impotency or for sexual failures of all kinds. What a remarkable gift it would be, for those in need, when it was accidentally discovered that the drug - sildenafil citrate, commonly used for treatment of angina, could be a stimulant for male Erectile dysfunction. The plaintiff became pioneer in commercially exploiting the same. When a drug of this nature hits the market, there are bound to be many players. More and more would inevitably enter the arena. They would make the exploit. And it is bound to create economic war. That is exactly what has happened in these cases.

A slightly needless introduction to a judgment, but we could all do with some bad, kinky humour once in a while, no?

(More judgments will come.)

Before Sunr-eyes!

The other day, when I watched Before Sunrise (again), I spent the entire movie watching their eyes. Through quick glances, fluttery glimpses, stares, glares and glints, their story unfolded, and the movie was even more enchanting than it used to be!

I love that stupendous scene in the listening room of a record store - their eyes truly rule it. The record starts playing, a guitar plays a repetitive string of chords, they look at each other briefly, smile and look away immediately. The scene is slightly claustrophobic (they're closer than they are comfortable being?) - the low, close camera angle, them leaning against the corner of a presumably small room, music all around them. They turn away from each other for a few seconds, and slowly, her gaze sets upon him. A smile is beginning to develop on her face when he suddenly turns to her. Deftly, she looks away - as if she had never been looking at him at all.

Now, he looks in her direction - his expression shows that he likes looking at her. Julie Delpy's cuteness sure is infectious. The song starts, she smiles to herself. He smiles, his eyes are still on her. She turns to him suddenly and catches his stare, he turns away uncomfortably and there is an impish smile on her face. They both look away at the soundproof walls around them.

It's her turn now. She barely looks in his direction when he turns to her. Has he caught her? The moment is too brief for her to really know. Then, he gets a good, long look her her as she pretends to take in the music, glancing at him from the corner of her eyes a couple of times. For a second, their eyes meet. They smile, but it is a fleeting one. Then, they're back to playing their game. She looks longingly while he stares at the ceiling and turns away just as he turns to her, he does the same, they flash slightly longer smiles at each other just as the singer croons, "I have never wanted you so much/ Come here." Then, the scene cuts to them walking down a road.

The scene in the listening room isn't more than a minute long, but their relationship strengthens from this point onwards - it is almost as if that closeness, those glimpses and that music somehow convinced them that their idea might not have been such a bad one after all. Maybe, it gave them time to be with each other, but not talk - something they didn't have until then.

Later that evening, they're sitting in a church (one of the few places open at that time of the night) and they've just had an aimless conversation about how she feels like a very old woman, and how he feels like a thirteen-year-old boy. She jokes about how, earlier, on the ferris wheel, it was a very old girl kissing a very young boy. She finds it funnier than he does. Their eyes meet, his hand reaches out and tucks her hair behind her ear.

He asks her, "Have you heard about the Quakers? The Quaker religion?"
She tells him she hasn't.
He says, "I went to this Quaker wedding once. It was fantastic." He goes on, "This couple comes and kneels down in front of the whole congregation, and nobody says a word unless they feel that God moves them to say it. Then, after about an hour of," a slight pause, he turns, fixes his eyes on her, "staring at each other, they're married."
"That's beautiful. I like that," she says.
He's staring at her now, watching her eyes, hoping she will also stare at his. Three or four seconds pass, she looks away. The look on his face tells us that he has realised that they still have a long way to go.

Somehow, they traverse that path very fast, for by morning, they cannot take their eyes off each other. They hear a harpsichord play from a house on the street, they look through the window to find a man actually playing it, peering nervously into the notation in a book. They watch him for a bit, and they launch into a brief, impromptu dance to the music. He asks her if she has ever danced to a harpsichord, she says, "Of course not..." He twirls her and releases her. She stands a foot-and-a-half away from him now.

Their eyes are locked, and he says, "Wow."
"What?" she asks, unsurely.
He puts his hands on her shoulders and says, "I'm going to take your picture... So that I don't forget you, or... or... all this."
"Ok. Me too."

Then, they face each other and just stare at each other, like the Quaker wedding, soaking in each other, till their mind cannot forget the scene. Their eyes look tired, because they haven't slept all night, but there's still a freshness about their gaze, there is longing, nostalgia for just the previous day, there is this urgency, there is even a touch of sadness. The photograph they take is not of that second, or that street, or of their faces, or the harpsichord-player - it is a photograph of an entire day - of the train, the men in the cow-play, the record store, the poet, the church, the concert in the bar, the wine, of making love. The photograph captures the fact that they will probably never be together like this again, and yet, that they are just where they want to be.
***

(I just realised that two of my favourite movies are set in Vienna. I wonder if that is just a coincidence.)

Break an Egg

Here are some choice comments and observations on Wake Up, Sid (in bullet point format for easy reading):

• The Director seems to have watched Dil Chahta Hai too many times (which is not a bad thing). And I think he liked parts of Lakshya also. So, there's either tons of internalisation (a la Kavya Vishwanathan) or lots of nudge-nudge-wink-wink-check-out-this-tribute to DCH (that scene where Ranbir Kapoor tells someone on the phone - "Mard ban. Be a man!").

• Every father seems to tell his son to "kal se office aa jaao" at the breakfast table after the son has scraped through (or, as in this case, not scraped through) college. We saw it in DCH, in Hero No. 1 and so on and so forth. Moral: chilled out sons must avoid the breakfast table.

• I have no issues with understated drama. But no drama? Instead, a series of highly convenient (non) events - not my tumbler of filter coffee. Even Sooraj Barjatya films are slightly edgier than this.

• Do all rich kids drink orange juice in the morning? If so, I want to be a rich kid. Yum. Orange Juice.

• I want to understand Konkona Sen's revenue model. The way she moved into a new home, painted and decorated it in a highly un-struggling-writerly manner even without having gotten her job was a bit much. Then, she just allowed Sid to stay with her, not thinking of how she would feed him two square meals a day. Maybe she was also a rich kid masquerading as a non-rich kid.

• Wasn't the Background Score highly elevatorly? Yet, it failed to elevate. (Ok. Fine. Bad joke. Sorry.)

• The paper birds in on the wires in the house represent the fact that the inhabitants are aware of the fact that they can fly, but they prefer sitting on a wire. If this were a Fellini film, I'm sure this interpretation would be welcomed with open arms in the psuedo circles. Unfortunately, this just seems to be the art director being arty and the director going along with the idea.

• Am I the only one who found it significant that Sid had major senti feelings towards the rain and his father's company manufactured showers?

• Is there any reason why one would cry at the end of the movie? (Other than crying out of sheer frustration.)
***

(a) No. I didn't hate the movie this much. Feeling slightly uncharitable currently.
(b) Oh, super super girl, Francis Buchanan (swalpa gender-identity-crisis) has a hilarious blog. Go read.

I am sorry if this post comes across as a rant. I don't have the energy to be funny right now.
***

For the last three months, I've been subject to Tamil serials in the evenings - from when I come back to work until ten-thirty. Thankfully, work ensures I get home only by nine-thirty on most days. Tamil serials are loud, brash, depressing. Characters only show the most disgusting emotions - of hate, jealousy, taking offence (a la the Culture Vultures), anger, 'honour', revenge.

The "bad" are intolerably bad - they always (and I mean ALWAYS) talk as if they're scheming (For instance, there was this scene where an evil mother-in-law was asking the cook to get milk for her granddaughter. She somehow made even that line sound evil!). Usually in the pettiest of manners. For instance, there is this lady who is behaving like she's unwell so that she can take advantage of her divorced daughter-in-law who takes pity on her. There's this other lady (in another serial) who (with her son) is trying to play some really really random politics in her brother's house - like creating a huge fuss when her nephew buys some expensive (Rs. 6000) jewellery for his wife. There was this other scene where the man's family troubles his pregnant wife only because she's earning and her husband is jealous of the whole deal. They complain that the coffee she's made is watery, that the cups in her house are too small, that the house is too uncomfortable.

Then there's all the ridiculous corporate battles they fight. Where they kill each other off without any trouble or remorse. Nobody is ever happy. Nobody is ever nice to another person. Except the VICTIM. The VICTIM is a central character who is simply too nice to everyone around her. (No, the VICTIM is never a man. A correct reflection of society, although a bit exaggerated.) Her niceness is always taken advantage of. People are always screwing her over. Always. And she still finds the strength to be intolerably nice to everyone. Only, she cries so much that you'd prefer her just getting screwed over instead of trying to be nice about it.

I wont even begin on the gender issues - every stereotype is reinforced. The thaali sentiment, dowry (In one serial going on right now, a wedding is stalled due to dowry issues, and not one voice is raised against the practice itself. Not even in the households watching these serials, I bet.) (Ok. Right now, as I type, the mother and daughter are having major issues because the daughter spilt rasam, thereby creating food shortages in the household.) Then there's the ubiquitous chinna veedu (literally, small house - "second family" of a man). Everyone seems to have one. And the domestic political possibilities of such a situation seem endless. There are always people to be jealous about, people to cry for, people to kill, illegitimacy and status to squabble over.

The music - can it be a little less harmful on the ear? Slightly?

I know that Tamilians as a class are highly petty people. But even by those standards, these serials are a bit much. Surely there are better stories to tell, no?