Your Wish...Off I go!Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Your Wish...Off I go!Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Sathya
I find the identity of caste itself as vulgar. Language, nation, gender are attributes that are not be definition hierarchical (adha vechu naan periyavan nee sinnavan nu adichukkalaam adhu Vera). OTOH, the notion of caste is completely different.
Historically and nationally privileged identity-a puncture koothinE irukkaaru (a trait he shares with certain politicians and certain political parties, therefore the trait itself must be political and if it's political, it's hypocritical. Follow the logic?), no wonder the extended vitriol and negative comments that he gets from the presupposed intellectual class of social networking age..
Adhe dhaanQuote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
Agree, same is the case with designation and hierarchical structure in an organization - I guess over a period of time, the hierarchy had lost the true meaning of - You wanna achieve or reach certain level, you should have certain attributes / skill sets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
You're soft.Quote:
Originally Posted by Plum
They have to ban me, to get me out of here. Fact.
And I'll withdraw into my rocks under with this:
Apropos nothing, Rahman's tamil announcement in IIFA :thumbsup:. edhukku sonnAr, epdi sonnAr mukkiyamillai. A big slap in the face of north indies bubble. When MammokkA criticises Bolly mentality in the same IIFA, it is just a shot in the dark. But when someone of Rahman's stature does it, it is a huge, huge slap on north indies inward looking, self-navel gazing attitude. idhula uLLa sentimentai partisan apdinnu naNbar sathya counterA eduthukka vAippu irukkuu so let me quote git clove about "puncturing the PRIVILEGED identitty", and claim exemption from hypocrisy.
I have a friend who is an atheist but is on the "right" side and strongly favors Hindutva viewpoints. He sees Hindu religion as having merits over other religions/cultures and he doesn't let it interfere with his atheism. Doesn't make him a hypocrite nor will I ask him to be an equal opportunity attacker. Well I may actually ask that but not because he is an atheist
To clarify, I meant Rahman's stature in North Indies. Not that Mammookka is of absolute lesser stature than Rahman. Directhit and Murali Srinivasaiyum pre-empt paNnidarEn.
Nan eduvumE sollaliyE :) look at my post wrt that speech.
Plum
Daily our nalla tropic discuss pannuvom, vandhu ponga
VaruvEn - When England stuff South africa in the test series appO varrEn..
:rotfl: Now I know. England > Ponting for you :teeplight:
Plum incidentally is the only Anglophobe to not turn me off. Yet he's the most intensely Anglophobic person in the hub.
wowie... wb plum...
innum force'a edhirpaakkuraen...
btw, :clap: to sathya....
and puncturing the previlage... recenta paattha oru b/w pada dialogue:
it is the duty of a newspaper to comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable.
adhadhaane seiyaraar?
I mean engaging with the ethos, the worldview of a culture. My contention is Kamal's films are seeped in a Hindu worldview in this sense. He invokes Gita in thEvar magan. Here's another thought experiment. Would a Vetrimaran or Ram do something similar with the same subject material? ?In anbE sivam, for a film with a fair degree of socialist/communist leanings, he sees it via the prism of god, traces the message to thirumUlar and so on, instead of merely dismissing the idea of God as the opium of the people and sticking to a materialist worldview. The approach is very different from how a radical-left director like Jananathan would have done it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
And it's not like this is an unrecognized dimension in his films. Many of the Tamil lit mag critics have routinely criticised him on these grounds. The individual criticisms may or may not be valid (often they are one-dimensional) but there's a certain truth to them.
sathya...Quote:
Originally Posted by sathya_1979
plum avar kodanaadu pOnadha patthi pesittu irukkaar... neenga yaen kurkure saapidreenga...?
The last film he wrote was dasAvathAram for crying out loud. Let's begin from the beginning; why did he even make such a film? :) It's the sheer proximity that offends people, I say!
Even Hitler loved Jews in some qualified ways.
Awkward silence. Sorry lads, I'm just a sad, twisted individual with no taste.
And keeping it short, longer paragraphs means more typing and it feels like work.
Moving on to Viswa, Circumcision should be KH's first real area of concern..
Hitler wanted to kill the Jews and imagined a world without them (even if one could argue he couldn't have lived without them). But seriously, come on, k-g. It's the exact opposite here. The Jew is the other for Hitler, the upper-caste Hindu is the self for Kamal.
And just to add to what I've said in the previous posts, do you seriously suggest Kamal's treatment is not seeped in Hindu mythology which is VERY UNLIKE how (to repeat my example) a Jananathan would do it? It's never just about what one's (sincere) standpoint is. The people who find a space in one's films, the people who are represented is absolutely crucial. Is it only to vociferously criticise brahminism that he spontaneously keeps returning to brahmin milieus, Hindu mythology in his films? (Note that brahmins haven't been proper antagonists in his films as the Zamindars once were in Indian films. Now, that would be the kind of portrayal that would be properly aligned to the Dravidian movement.) They simply are around in his films. He criticises their values and so on, I'm not arguing otherwise. But isn't there more to it than just that?
http://www.posterparty.com/images/tv...r-TRrp1533.jpg
I was messing with you. Like I often do. (See the later posts)
I know what you're hitting at.
In a manner of speaking, even Welles put it about THE atheistic filmmaker of all time, 'He is a deeply Christian man who hates God as only a Christian can, and, of course, he's very Spanish. I see him as the most supremely religious director in the history of the movies.'
Equa, k_g is just being flippant. You should have inferred that from the fact that, no one in their right mind can be less than deferential to Sachin.
idhAru? Bunuel-mbAingaLE? avarA?Quote:
Originally Posted by kid-glove
indha mAdhiri discussion-gaLla devil's advocate-A irukkuRavan kooda total-A tharisAguradhukku dhAn vAippu adhigam. irundhAlum kattAyam indha thyAgaththai naan senju dhaan aagaNum...
Race, ethnic identity of any sort, tribal roots (Africa mudhal North East states varai) problem idhu dhaan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
In the olden days when we here of wars between Kings, isn't it a war between two contesting ways of life? That's right 'ways of life'. In some cases it was religion, in others it was caste (a broad definition of it). Someone going to war is going there prepared to die for a way of life, isn't it?
Can you imagine a Saivite-Vaishnavite fight now? When Kadalangudi Natesayyar built the SivaVishnu temple in T Nagar, I guess it must have been a great step forward in intergration :lol: Today most of us are: theriyumadA, reNdum oNNu dhaana dA, kozhappureengaLE dA :lol:
In the past caste (and religion) defined a complete way of life. This is true to much lesser extent now than earlier. Dtill it is important to remind ourselves that it is very much true even today - much more than we would like to acknowledge - but naan pointukku varEn...
The question I always like to ask is - do we today feel a sense of affinity for a stranger of one's own caste. i.e. feel an affinity simply because he belongs to one's own caste (namma paya). Most of us feel no such thing. But for our parents, grandparents would have felt that way. The identity was more important to them.
And even in their case I allege, it was largely to do with how a certain caste dictated a way of life, even including education, exposure, employment etc.
Now, we all still judge people based on education, exposure, employment etc. But these are primary considerations and therefore caste is relegated to the background. i.e. we aren't "better" people than our previous generations. Just that the social relevance of caste has watered down.
The way such a thing goes out of the window is by social irrelevance.
I will refrain from making the shaky argument that caste can persist without discrimination. That is not something I can say with certainty. But it is certainly true that over time there has been a great decoupling.
Ambedkar argues exceedingly well in his treatise "the Annihilation of Caste" that it is impossibly for caste to exist without discrimination. That, it is either a genuinely naive pipe-dream or intentionally duplicitous line of thinking to say caste can exist without discrimination.
And it had to go. Of course, being the thinker that he is, he saw caste for what it was - a social institution that rose from the ground over time- rather than as a cunning scheme whose sole purpose of existence was subjugation. And most importantly he observed that the urge to preserve caste identities is definitely not something top-down but across the board in the hierarchy.
Which is not surprising because caste was coupled (more so in the 1930s than now) in shaping an Indian's personality just as much as other forms of identity - language, religion etc. Imagine what it means to say that in the 1930s when people were offering pussyfooted compromises, that the whole thing needs to go and intermarriages are the only way out!
Beyond this point the questions here need to be inward. Because in a public debate, people feel compelled to respond, defend their positions etc. and it is hardly productive.
Now forget identity for a moment. There are people who fall in love and walk out of their families to marry. To them their individual choices are more important. The family is less relevant to them. (note: I am not talking about intercaste marriage or anything, yet. Just talking about viewing marriage as an individual choice vs. extension/addition to a family tree)
Now, who can marry outside their language? The one's who think that that is not a fundamental part of their identity. That they feel they do not need such a shared cultural root to make a relationship work. Can't share literature, pop-culture references, idioms, cultural mores. But all these could happen to be less important to some people. More important to others.
Same for religion, same for nationality and same for caste. All of the above have happened in my family and close friends' circle. In each of the cases I have seen an intial whimper and then it becomes about the person - and like all marriages it's been about give and take. Quite possibly the case with many of you too.
It is as and when a 'shared cultural background' becomes more and more irrelevant that these identities will dissipate.
The point to note is: its only when a cultural continuity becomes irrelevant that an individual can make such choices.
Now, one curious thing may happen. The family can still take up the identity of more dominant partner. Or it can take on a mix of identities from both partners and what is felt as irrelevant baggage will drop and a new identity will get created. But it is my opinion that some sort of identity will exist.
Personally, I don't think we will ever become like America, or for that matter those of Indian origin in other countries - who can't trace their ancestry back to more than 4-5 generations. It is only in such contexts of substantial absence of social history can caste 'vanish'. In our case, I think it will continue to exist, but what it means will keep changing. And changing for the 'good'.
btw naan solRa social irrelevance ellAm oru small sliver of the population-ku dhaan.
For most of the people caste oppressive reality - it has not gone anywhere, we can't remind ourselves enough of that.
Recently in Kammapatti, the local Kambalathu Nayakars stopped sending their children to school because the saththuNavu koodam was manned by Dalits. And so the government transferred the Dalit staff :shock:
The additional collector defended this discrimination by saying: 'this is a peculiar habit of that caste to not eat food cooked by other castes'. Check out this article - ignore the dumb title!
And mind you TN is one of the leading states when it comes to social mobility of Dalits. ingayE indha nilamai - with govt supporting discrimination to boot - then just imagine the situation in places in North Indies.
Remember Periyar came out of Congress, because they were using party funds to support the gurukulam in Cheranmadhevi, where permission was given to brahmin boys to dine privately, because their parents did not want them to dine in a samapandhi bOjanam. And that was in the 1920s!
I recently came across this quote and find it very meaningful. (except F word usage)
http://i.imgur.com/VZlyv.jpg.jpg
Typically superficial point by Carlin.
ketta vArththai sonnA indhaaLu cool-aam. sariyAna mokkai.
இல்லைன்னாலும் செறிவான கருத்துதானே!Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
What is "I" ngradhu dhaan saar panjAyaththE.Quote:
Originally Posted by venkkiram
இப்போ கார்லின் இருக்கிற இடத்துல கமலஹாசன் என எழுதி இதே வாசகத்தை (கெட்ட வார்த்தையெல்லாம் நீக்கி) முக நூல்களில் உலவ விட்டால் ரசிகர்களிடமிருந்து நிறைய பாராட்டுக்களை பெறுவார். சந்தேகமேயில்லை. ஏனென்றால் அவர் நமது வேர்களை எல்லாமே அசைத்து வருவபர்.Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
:lol: Me - Blood, You - Tomato satni
Carlin is not funny.
Tries had to be insightful - I can't take too much naked anger. enakku ellAthulayin nAsookku thEvai.
So he comes across as a bit of a bitter smartass to me.
On the other hand Louis CK is :thumbsup:
Sir, B(K) ellAm theeviramAna Carlin visiRi.Quote:
Originally Posted by sathya_1979
Sorry, ivangaLLaam yaarunu theriyaadhu. padichittu varrEn, pEsalaam (Now back from Billa and having dinner at Midnight :oops: )
+1 with P_R on Carlin. Never quite dig him...
Was. Ippovum Carlin-ku oru soft corner, respett etc but becoming a Louis CK visiri (thanks to you for introducing)Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
Suggested reading / speakers on atheism please - Without reference to religion, I mean only "No God" speakers / writers
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by sathya_1979
adhAvadhu saamiyE illaingalAm
aanaa illAdha saamiyai thittappadaadhu
adhaan illainteella, appadiyE pOyiru