Every time I look at Taj Mahal, I am overcome with confusing and overlapping emotions. The predominant one is of course awe and pride but nagging somewhere behind is yet another feeling- something that takes away from the joy. ….It is perhaps the image of Mumtaz Mahal dying in her 14th childbirth at the age of 38 all in the name of love!
Make no mistake, I still believe in Taj as India's pride and an architectural marvel. Neither am I blaming Shahjahan. On the contrary infact. He thought of dedicating something so beautiful in her memory when he could have got away with doing nothing and simply moving on to many more Mumtazes. We cannot judge a man of 17th century with our definitions of 21st century!! That she was his constant companion and pillar of support is well known. There is no denying that he loved her intensely, and confirmed to the rules and definitions of those times when bearing a king's 14th child in rapid succession spoke of their love and commitment to each other, despite harems and two other wives.....pun unintented. Yet I cannot but lament the state of women in those times...at the definition of love that existed (still exists in many rural areas).
Nineteen years of marriage, 14 children, 8 of whom died at birth or young age!!!Anybody familiar with the human body knows that every pregnancy takes its toll on the woman's body. Mumtaz's condition must have started deteriorating early on in her string of pregnancies, and yet she moved on to her fourteenth pregnancy!! What were her compulsions, and more importantly what were Shahjahan's compulsions? Love? Society? Relegion? Sadly, none of these seem to provide the understanding, for nothing is greater than life itself- in this case, life of a dearly loved wife and queen. What then I wonder must have been the fate of the ordinary woman?
Why comment on the past? Aren't we still plagued by the same ailment today. Aren't there still ways, means and methods to subjugate a woman and make her fall in line with the male dominated society. One single peep into the ignored back alleys of rural India would confirm it. The Mumtazes of this world still happily(?) and sometimes helplessly succumb to their fate- not as defined by God but by man or society.
We are no doubt moving forward, times are changing and more importantly mindsets are changing. The definitions of partner, husband, wife, companion are changing- Thank God for that...and yet miles to go before concepts like ''true loving caring and sharing'' get translated into deeds across the board, across the Indian society.
Shahajahan was reportedly inconsolable at the death of his constant companion and love. It was an end of a life of someone kind, beautiful and loving. Today, the Taj Mahal stands as the ultimate monument to intense love, and a homage to her beauty and life. If only she had been given more of a chance at life.......
Thursday 7 January 2010
Sunday 3 January 2010
Idiots?
Once again we witness a phenomenon which is by no account new. Its an age old conflict...not between talents.. but between egos...pure simple egos..which makes idiots:-) out of intelligent people.
The people involved in the spat are all great talents with great egos.Unfortunately ego is known to grow faster than talent and thats when problems such as these emerge.
The creative team of idiots does not want to share credit with Chetan Bhagat beyond what they deem necessary, and Chetan Bhagat who actually gave birth to the concept is not ready to hand over the baby to the legal surrogate adopters....Actually what both are doing is trying to tell the world that one is more talented than the other and hence, do not want to share the credit. I wonder, wouldn't it have been easy on all concerned to give due credit to the original creator as well as screenplay writer. The story is indeed Chetan Bhagat's....however the situations and the creativity are the screenplayer's, equally important ....What's the issue?
Before this controversy broke out, this creative team, in my eyes(its a personal opinion of a fan) was a sensitive one which thought of great phenomenons like Gandhigiri. Today the talent and success perhaps have gone up but perhaps the sensitivity has gone down. Same for Chetan Bhagat. If everybody thought like him then its Thomas Edison alone and no one else who deserves credit for all the subsequent innovations made with light and electricity. Idiotic indeed..pun intented.
The issue is EGOS! We do not want to share, we like to possess each and every word that we write or even think of. It blinds us. Proven over time, sharing credit has always made a person seem big hearted and generous and yet when ego rules, the same sharing appears to us to be taking away our credit!!!...Subsequent actions, when we assume that we are protecting our rights, are actually the ones which actually make small hearted idiots out of us...
As for Amir Khan saying that Chetan Bhagat is trying to take credit away from someone lesser known than him...Strange logic!! Perhaps, then it is time for Amir Khan to stop acting and let other lesser known actors get a chance for limelight..Weird logic, isn't it? The issue here is not how popular one is but rather MERIT!....
A fruit seller needs as much credit for bringing fruit to people as the gardener who planted the seed, both need to give each other due respect.... I wish they would not be so miserly with their appreciation for each other...true respect doesnot cost anything(in most of the cases at least) and goes a long way in ways far more intangible than contracts or awards are tangible!
The people involved in the spat are all great talents with great egos.Unfortunately ego is known to grow faster than talent and thats when problems such as these emerge.
The creative team of idiots does not want to share credit with Chetan Bhagat beyond what they deem necessary, and Chetan Bhagat who actually gave birth to the concept is not ready to hand over the baby to the legal surrogate adopters....Actually what both are doing is trying to tell the world that one is more talented than the other and hence, do not want to share the credit. I wonder, wouldn't it have been easy on all concerned to give due credit to the original creator as well as screenplay writer. The story is indeed Chetan Bhagat's....however the situations and the creativity are the screenplayer's, equally important ....What's the issue?
Before this controversy broke out, this creative team, in my eyes(its a personal opinion of a fan) was a sensitive one which thought of great phenomenons like Gandhigiri. Today the talent and success perhaps have gone up but perhaps the sensitivity has gone down. Same for Chetan Bhagat. If everybody thought like him then its Thomas Edison alone and no one else who deserves credit for all the subsequent innovations made with light and electricity. Idiotic indeed..pun intented.
The issue is EGOS! We do not want to share, we like to possess each and every word that we write or even think of. It blinds us. Proven over time, sharing credit has always made a person seem big hearted and generous and yet when ego rules, the same sharing appears to us to be taking away our credit!!!...Subsequent actions, when we assume that we are protecting our rights, are actually the ones which actually make small hearted idiots out of us...
As for Amir Khan saying that Chetan Bhagat is trying to take credit away from someone lesser known than him...Strange logic!! Perhaps, then it is time for Amir Khan to stop acting and let other lesser known actors get a chance for limelight..Weird logic, isn't it? The issue here is not how popular one is but rather MERIT!....
A fruit seller needs as much credit for bringing fruit to people as the gardener who planted the seed, both need to give each other due respect.... I wish they would not be so miserly with their appreciation for each other...true respect doesnot cost anything(in most of the cases at least) and goes a long way in ways far more intangible than contracts or awards are tangible!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)