What surprised me about 'Hugo'

Every time I chance to watch a realistic depiction of the world in the 20th century, I get a bit of a shock. This shouldn't really be the case, considering the fact that I was born a good eleven years before the century ended. Also, most of the books I have read - be it Enid Blyton, Wodehouse, Agatha Christie or more recently,  James Joyce and Salman Rushdie - have been set in the 20th century. And the world I read about in these books never seemed so vastly different from mine. True, there were no cell phones or computers but I too have lived a life without either of these gadgets and  that life is one I can easily identify with even today. Much as I can identify with the 20th century world portrayed in the books. There were cars then, there are cars now. The same goes for trains, buses, electricity, T-shirts, shorts, pianos, concerts, microphones, rabies vaccines and everything else that makes our time different from those dark, historical, medieval times where people used oil lamps, wore long robes and hewed their musical instruments from single pieces of wood.
Yet, when yesterday, I saw 'Hugo',  my initial reaction was : 'Ah! 19th century France'. And I wasn't the only one who thought so, she did too. Then, when within the film, talk of 'the cinema' began, I adjusted that reaction to 'Ah! Early 20th century France'. Soon 'the war' (which was clearly the First World War)  was talked about in the past tense; yet again I found myself pushing forward my consciousness of time, and then finally, my curiosity piqued considerably, out came the droid, straight to Wikipedia and I confirmed the actual year of the film's action: 1931! Which was a piddly fifty eight years before I was born into the world I have been repeatedly claiming familiarity with. Quite disturbing.

Has the world really changed beyond recognition since 1931 or is this the effect of Scorcese's superb use of 3D? To confirm it either way, I'm going to list three differences between the world of Hugo and the world of Andrew.

1. Gare Montparnasse Railway station : Since most of the film is set at the railway station, this is easily the most glaring difference. Pictures say it best :

                                                                                                       [Copyright Jean-Marie Hullot]

                                                                            vs

It's not just the fact that the trains in Hugo's world look like they are fresh out of James Watt's imagination, it's the entire station. Most of it is lighted by fire, the clocks  are possessed of quaintly elaborate winding mechanisms and in spite of what the station master had to say as regards the correct type of non poetic activity proper to it, a lot of people seem to come to the railway station only to socialize.This Master(plus his ugly dog)  is wholly responsible for handling security in the huge station. And his only security related activity  seems to be mopping up homeless children and sending them off to the orphanage. An almost inconceivable scenario in today's terrorist threatened world. 

2. Paris' streets : Having never been to Paris after birth, I cannot provide the most accurate account of its streets. I am, however, reasonably sure that they bear nothing but the barest-bones resemblance to the dark, dingy, cold bylanes portrayed in Hugo where the tallest building is three storeys high. And where the frequency of cars in what should have been a crowded area is so minuscule that a small boy can run amok without the slightest respect for objects that could make French toast of him. Not that small boys on the streets of Bombay are any different; that however, is another concern and will be dealt with in a later post about 'proles'.

3. People: There wasn't the most in depth examination of 'life' within the story of Hugo; most of the film is centred around two characters. There are, however, a few insights. One is children's rights - if France's could be like that, I dread to imagine the rest of the world.  Another is courtship; the station master actually got himself a wife by doing what he did - today he'd probably end up with a lawsuit. Yet another is the fact that people seemed to be less sophisticated and more easily pleased - however novel and pioneering George Melies' techniques may have  been, I don't see modern audiences being amused by the silly dances and disjointed sequences within his films. These days, if something is innovative, but stupid and pointless, it is generally declared so and scorned. Like Siri by Apple. 

It is safe to say two things : a) that macroscosmically, film well made portrays life  far better than any book can possibly hope to  and b) that the world has changed more in the last hundred years than  in the previous three hundred; indeed a middle aged man living in 1912 would be more at home in 1612 than in 2012. This may have something to do with the fact that a war, more devastating than the one mentioned in the film soon followed and changed the world forever. 

                                          

The West Indian Axis: Behind the scenes

The dubious antics of Tiger Woods and Shane Warne have long had me wondering if sportsmen have a different definition of the word 'commitment' from the rest of us. And now, just as my doubts were beginning to be put at bay, Chris Gayle comes out with this:
"I wish to advise that as of today, May 2nd, 2012, I have written to Somerset CC and advised them that I will not be honouring the commitment I made to them when I signed a contract with them for the 2012."

Lots of advising Chris, and thank you for that, but the 'not be honouring the commitment' part of the statement has me confounded. Doesn't a 'commitment', by its inherent nature, have to be honoured?  Andrew Strauss thinks so; as his rejection of a  6 million dollar IPL offer in favour of a county stint for Middlesex proves.

Nevertheless, Darren Sammy's reaction to the contract breach was nothing short of ambiguous, and we  like our precision. We caught up with him and demanded a justification of his lack of enthusiasm towards the forthcoming return of the prodigal IPL prodigy.
 "Of course I'll justify it" said the amiable Sammy. "I regularly justify matters far more fundamental than that".
(Note to the reader : He means his place in the side)
"Winning games (single-handed, on talent alone) is something Gayle has become used to since leaving the West Indies team a year ago. This is the antithesis of the Hilaire-Gibson-Sammy vision for the team.
 "This team works hard a a unit, loses as a unit and introspects as a unit. We always decide to do better next time, but most importantly, we reaffirm our commitment to staying within our limitations. This is often difficult  (here Sammy's eyes began to flash) - it involves sacrificing one's dreams of bending a ball like Waqar and embracing one's role as a stock bowler. It involves staying focused on doing what one does best : bowling 120kph straight deliveries."
We were somewhat confused by the last statement, so we've set it down as is, and invite debate upon it.

However, Sammy's view isn't shared by all West Indian cricket lovers. A reporter got hold of Tony Cozier and asked the grand old historian what he thought of the new 'disciplined' approach  of Team Sammy. Here's what transpired :

Tony :  Ottis Gibson and Ernest Hillaire are trying to change the way cricket is played in the Carribean. The uninhibited Carribean style which has, for years churned out great talents, the likes of Malcolm Marhsall, Michael Holding, Sir Vivian Richards, Brian Lara ..... "

Reporter : So you don't think any of the current West Indians have the potential to emulate the feats of these former greats ? How about Narine? " ..

T:  Dinanath Ramnarine's contribution to Carribean cricket has been questionable. But cricket, played in the good old days when West Indies dominated world cricket had names like Clive Lloyd, Gordon Greenidge, Sir Garfield Sobers, Sir Everton Weekes .. "

R: "What about Darren Bravo? General opinion in the Carribean is that he is a fitting replacement for the Prince himself .. "

T: Opinion in the Carribean is as fickle as  the standard of domestic cricket is low. Most of these fans  have not even seen the truly great West Indians play. Players  of the calibre of Desmond Haynes, Alvin Kalichharan, Sir Frank Worrell, Sir George Headley...

(The rest of Tony's interview consisted of a monologue of proper nouns. It lasted five minutes and most of it can be retrieved by querying statsguru for dead West Indian players of the 60s and 70s)

To round off our set of interviews, we chose Coach Controversial and asked him his goals for the England Test seires. His was of the opinion  that  slow is the right way to go as long as the West Indies are improving.  "We aim to lose the  test series  2-0, assuming one match gets rained off" said Gibson, . "However, we intend to take heart from the manner in which we lose. This will be the difference between us and teams from the last fifteen years."
"Our goal is to last four days in the matches we lose. Bowling wise, we intend to address our problem of keeping numbers 8,9,1,0 and 11 to less than 200. Batting wise, our goal is to pass 300 at least once. If we can achieve this, we will have progressed well since the Australia series. I'm confident the boys will step up and give the fans something to cheer about. "

That's a lot of goals, coach. A real taskmaster is our Ottis. At this rate, the West Indies will be storming into the top six by the end of this decade.

Talking (Rant One).

Browsing through facebook yesterday, I came upon a lovely picture :

It cast me right back into the days of St Stanislaus. I could very well picture the same expression on the face of the man who made the post: Karan Sinroja . And I also remember the number of times we had teachers tearing their hair, throwing chalk pieces, dishing out slaps, making boys slap themselves and a whole host of other things teachers in boys schools regularly do when confronted with this vicious activity in which young minds will insist on participating - talking.
I particularly remember two instances when my mother (whom I never enjoyed seeing around my school because, well, apart from a few Rushils and Thomases, the school presence of a mother is extremely embarrassing to the young male mind) was summoned to the school to be encouraged to chastise me for this terrible habit of mine. Time one was in the third standard when my class teacher was Angela, a young teacher who called my mother 'Fleur' . "Fleur" , said Teacher Angela "I don't know what to do, he's talking so much" , while my mum looked disapprovingly at me. "I've made him put his finger on his lip, I even gave him a slap in front of the class, but he refuses to not talk!!" And my mother continued to disapprovingly shake her head; I think she even tried to fake an angry expression.

While writing this a thought occurred to me - in these ridiculous days it is very possible that Teacher Angela would be hauled up by the state for  subjugation of the will (placing my mouth under finger arrest), torture (slap) and if I were in the United States of Americanism , trauma (public slap) . Nevertheless those were more sensible times and Teacher Angela was politely informed by my mother that she'd get my father to speak to me.

Fast forward three years and my class teacher is one Teacher Neeta who entertained notions of one Darryl D'souza following in the footsteps of Anu Malik as chief composer of the Bollywood film of questionable quality. This Darryl, however, has one composition of merit to his name; I remember it like it were my very own admonition-of-the-discourteous-while-studying-Maharashtra-Board's-'Value-Education'. Here are the lyrics:

"Dirty clothes and uncombed hair
Make people say, 'He's so uncourteous!'
But clean clothes and combed hair
Make people say, 'He's so courteous!'
And that is why we say
'A clean and tidy person
Always finds success' "

For the music notes, you will have to contact me in person because I am too lazy to score them and upload them. Nevertheless, while Darryl's melodic line began to lose it's way at 'And that is why we say .. ' , up until then it was of sterling quality and I have a good mind to petition Philip Glass to write a minimalist composition entitled 'Variations on a theme by Darryl D'souza' . Remind me about that in case I forget.

Teacher Neeta, however, was shabbily disappointed by this piece of music. Like a raucous critic, she sent Darryl's composition straight back to the bench on the front row from whence it came. She then petitioned yours truly to 'teach him no ... to write proper song' . What did I do? Involved mummy of course, who plagiarised a popular hymn (and personal favourite of my then principal) "Oh Give Thanks To The Lord For He Is Good" and modified the lyrics with the help of a few of her friends which satisfied Teacher Neeta's lofty tastes most completely.

Anyway, I have rambled considerably, but the point I was making is that Teacher Neeta, after services rendered and brownie points with principal earned was in no mood to show gratitude towards yours truly. Oh, no. She met my mother on the school stairs (and there was my mother, just waiting to be met I tell you) , shrugged her shoulders, thrust out her eyes and exclaimed "HOW MUCH HE'S TALKING!" with the last word taking on an unusual sort of inflection which a particular brand of teacher at my school was very familiar with.
And again I was thrown reproachful looks at, TV watching was threatened, and all the usual results of such a situation descended. All because I engaged in that one activity : Talking .
                                                                                                       [To be continued ........]