Paradise Lost - Delhi Winters

Delhi is no paradise. Delhi is a tough, rough city. Just like a person can be explained in terms of her attitude, traits, values, and beliefs, so can a city. And the adjectives which come to mind for Delhi are not complementary - brash, rude, violent, uncouth. It is like a truant, doped, teenager showing the middle finger whenever someone extends a helping hand or seeks help, who laughs at your shock, who puffs smoke of cigarette in your face whenever you look for any redeeming features. No redemption here. The phrase ‘Dilli dilwalon ki hai’ (Delhi has people with big heart) is nothing more than a wordplay and only slightly more vacuous than the phrase ‘Spirit of Mumbai’.

But, just like in everything, there is a ‘but’. Delhi has some redeeming features (which like most cities in this country, the cities themselves or their governments do not care about). I can list four - (a) wide multi-laned roads, boulevards, and one of the best physical infrastructure in the country; (b) plenty of gardens and green patches including jungles and ridges (one realises their importance after seeing places like Mumbai where a blade of grass is a cause for celebration); (c) food - basically all kinds but the best and most unique are the chats and sweets, in fact the city serves amazing options of the latter (again, sweets are a luxury in Mumbai); and finally (d) winters. I know many people would have personal choices and would like to debate many of these but I find these four to be the best aspects of this city. And lest I sound like a Mumbai-basher, let me admit that Mumbai too has many positives over Delhi (the eternal Delhi vs Mumbai debate) but nothing beats Delhi on these factors.

This piece is to focus on one aspect - Delhi winters, that weather which evokes so many emotions in me that I wish I was a poet, or a better writer. Most of my memories of this city are serenely wrapped in the fog of its winter - winters of catching the school bus in dark and reaching school in light, wearing shorts, freezing but loving it; winters of dark, chilly mornings when life comes alive slowly, like that gently brewing tea on soft flame in the kitchen; winters of eating carrots and pungent radishes in afternoon; winters of dark evenings when poignancy shrouds the heart like blanket and makes one want to remember and cry; winters of day times looking lost and clueless like estranged lovers; winters of early morning wind which can shock and energise; winters when fulfilment is all about staying in blanket the whole day watching TV or reading or writing; winters of riding the bus with open window/gate with sharp wind chilling the whole body still giving a stupid excitement; winters of bus floor littered with peanut shells; winters of shawls, sweaters and jackets, mostly ugly, but at times sharply stylish and beautiful; winters of exhibitions, galleries and All American Diner; winters of open air performances in Old Fort where the chill distracts you but still enhances the performance; winters of picnics in parks and Humayun’s Tomb; winters of deserted streets and Lutyen’s Delhi; winters of endless chais on dhabas while staring at the dark wall that is the jungle of Sanjay Van; winters of half marathons, long jogs and unending walks; winters of hot soups, paranthas, halwas, jalebis, hot flavoured milk; winters of dry fruits; winters of the warmth of motherly love or lover’s embrace. Only a Delhiite can understand most of what I have said.

Delhi winter is a treasure - of memories, incidents, events, longings collected over the age; a scrapbook, a montage, so precious that its loss bleeds the heart. And as of now, the loss looks permanent. And to what? Human folly, lethargy, and procrastination. The last few years have seen Delhi winters witness extreme ambient pollution levels which have made the city a gas chamber. Media coverage has been relentless, especially over the last two years but I know this has been a phenomenon of 4-5 years. So we have foreign nationals refusing to stay in the city, countries issuing travel (non)advisory, social media abuzz with meaningful and meaningless, people becoming half scientists individually diligently measuring air quality index (AQI) and pronouncing the quality as ‘Severe’ and spelling out technical difference between different air masks and air purifiers; and media as well as businesses benefiting from the hysteria by churning stories and products around this situation without any meaningful contribution. All in all India as usual.

The problem is there is no clear, scientific understanding of the situation, at least none that I have found. What has started causing such poor air quality over the last 4-5 years? Is it the case of gradual build-up over the years or has there been some major structural change which has suddenly tipped the scale? In either of the cases, what were the causative factors in order of importance? Is it a problem only of Delhi or also of areas within 100-200 kms range? Is it one major problem or a sum of many small factors? Is farm burning the major issue? Then does it not happen twice a year? Or why was it not a problem say 5 years back? Or are vehicles and construction the biggest contributors? Then why no drastic steps against these? How can cracker burning be a big culprit when it is largely a single day event? Then aren’t these incessant appeals against cracker burning by all and sundry just a case of propagation of thoughtless messages in the garb of sounding enlightened and guardians of greater good instead of actually applying brains? Aren’t odd-even and temporary construction bans classic cases of Indian jugaad or resourcefulness, biding time, waiting for the weather to turn or for the next big story to distract the masses, instead of taking difficult, long-term steps to tackle the problem? Why do we not get more concrete facts, figures and logical explanations from researchers and experts, if at all there is research/genuine thought around the issue? Overall the media, politicians, intelligentsia is more capable of managing the environment around environment than actually tackling the environment problem.

While I know the answers to some of the questions, but I am pointing out the obvious gaps in public thought around the issue, at least going by how it is playing in the media. Long term planning and strong action have never been India’s forte and there seems to be no change here as well. Because nobody wants to take strong, difficult countermeasures which would require sacrifices which are discomforting and painful. The very Delhi population who is crying hoarse (literally) against the pollution will not be willing to not actually reduce their vehicle usage on a sustainable basis, or look to undertake construction activities in a safer manner, or overall be conscious about their carbon footprint. In India it is always somebody else’s fault, and somebody else’s repentance and correction.  

Never mind. My biggest pain is that I have been robbed of my beloved Delhi winters. It is barely possible to step out of home, leave alone enjoying the weather. One can only it to the extent possible to do inside a car. I have decided to inculcate the habit of getting up early, only to realise that I can barely take advantage of this weather which is (or would have been) even more beautiful at that time - I can’t go for long walks or run. I started bicycling in this weather, but had to give up because of a bad chest congestion. Delhi winters are now like a zombie, like a ventilator patient who I am seeing from behind a glass as my own eyes become glass, like a romance which is now un-pure, tarnished, like a reality which has become a dream. Just sit tight, hold your breath, write blogs, and wait for weather to change.   

The world’s a stage

But this play is a joke

You will not exit with a graceful bow

But with an ugly choke

Newton - Movie Review

Rajkumar Rao had struck me as an actor in Kai Po Che (2013). While it helped that I loved the movie, the earnestness of his acting caught attention. And since then I have followed his growth as an actor with delight. While I have not seen many of movies, I nevertheless get chuffed by his choice of movies. So far he has not been distracted by big banners or big money at the cost of the quality of roles. At the same time his marketability has grown which means he would have some bargaining power and would not get marginalised over time. He seems to have found that special place in the largely mediocre Bollywood where he is able to do justice to his skills, and at the same time command an audience, the kind of space that only actors like Irfan Khan and Nawazuddin Siddiqui have been able to find. The best part is that all three of them are not great looking but you want to see them on screen.

So watching Newton with Rajkumar Rao in lead, with its quirky name, and with rave reviews had become mandatory. And I liked it. I am not using the superlative ‘loved’, and there is a reason which needs elaboration. Right now Bollywood is split into three kinds of movies - nonsense cinema which it has been always making and which it continues to make because it requires limited effort and sells readily. This segment makes for bulk of the output and is liked on a mass scale with endorsement from mainstream actors, primarily SRK and SK. Then there are movies by mainstream stars like Aamir Khan and Akshay Kumar which are commercial but with stronger storyline. They tell a good, relevant story, but in a populist manner. The extent to which they are sugar-coated distances them from reality. And the third category is of hard-hitting stories, which can make one uncomfortable. These are usually slice-of-real-life, reflecting truer version of India. This category of movies has come into prominence over the last decade or two and is the most positive change for Bollywood. Such movies have championed the craft of movie-making. They do not insult intelligence and give emotional satisfaction. Movies such as Dor, Masaan, Kai Po Che, Lootera, Shor in the City, Do dooni Char etc. fall into this category. The key trait is that such movies keep story at the center and the story is not necessarily to please. I am deeply appreciative of such movies and of actors like Abhay Deol, Irfan Khan, Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Vinay Pathak, Ranvir Sheorey, Vijay Raaz, Nandita Das, Konkana Sen Sharma, Richa Chaddha, KK Menon, Shreyas Talpade, Sanjay Mishra, Pankaj Tripathi who have been the trailblazers.

Nevertheless, there is one problem. India is a large, diverse country with many problems - personal and social, as well as a wide set of milieu. Most of the new wave Bollywood now reaps this fertile field - by taking up a socio-cultural-political problem, or to look at a new milieu. So after a point, films such as Ugly, Titli, Raman Raghav and Badlapur start looking similar in that they put light on the dark, grotesque underbelly of a seemingly calm society. Or movies like Dum Laga ke Haisha, Tanu Weds Manu 2, Vicky Donor, Ishqiya, etc primarily celebrate capturing a new milieu with accurate characterisation, dialogues and mannerism. Or the favourite is to show a compendium of parallel stories. So after following such movies for some time, one starts to find a sameness. A totally new ground in terms of content or treatment is difficult to find. In contrast, Hollywood explores way more diverse fields which extend cinema as a craft in terms of story, acting, direction, sets, technology etc - Schindler’s List, Dunkirk, Dark Knight, Blade Runner and so many more.

Newton for me partly had the same problem - it was not actually breaking any new ground. Still it is to be liked for its honest portrayal. And for a novice mind like me, it is good to explore the layers of the movie subtly over time. The premise is similar - a satire on the state of affairs in the country. Here the context is elections - widely touted as our biggest achievement and a show of strength of our democracy; throwing in the issues of clash of idealism with cynicism, authoritarian mistreatment, voicelessness of the tribals, and short-sightedness of Western media. But all these are treated with a very light hand - absolutely no preaching, sermonising or even taking stands.

But for me the biggest strength of the movie is its play on cynicism. Cynicism is a concept which I grapple with and which will get a separate blog post. This movie first takes you on a cynical ride and then mocks you for being a cynic. The central character Newton is an idealist who wants to go absolutely by the book while conducting polls in a makeshift booth in interiors of Maoist land with only a handful of registered voters - mostly tribals. So despite constant refrains, he would personally go there (and not let some cop go and get the votes), set up a proper polling booth, educate all voters on the sanctity of the process, run the polling station till the prescribed hour, and fight with his life to not lose even two votes. After a while, you actually start thinking he is going too far. What is he going to achieve? You stop feeling for him and think he deserved the thrashing he got for being such a pain. What exactly will he achieve by lecturing those tribals on the virtues of democracy and polling? You start to side with the security head - Aatma Singh for being practical. And if the viewers felt like this, the movie says that the joke is on you.

Nearer home, one questions the purpose of such elections. What exactly will be achieved by conducting a fair election when the voters have no clue of the contestants, of the process, and of the consequences? They have a simple life and would just want lesser atrocities from authorities. But the cause and effect of a fair election and democracy hardly seem to apply to them. Will their lives get any better even if the elections were held fairly? Isn’t the process of election here more a case of man-with-the-hammer, of senseless application of a placebo. The desperation of Newton for fairness, which grows over the length of the movie, reaches farcical proportions. What is Newton trying to achieve here? And what exactly did he achieve? We do not know if the electoral sanctity is maintained at the end - the votes could have been tampered with after Newton is beaten. But then Newton is not foolish! Can’t he see what all of us can see? He can, but he has decided to take a stand. He is not a hero, he is just standing for the right without thinking about the consequences. That is where he is showing others off - that the line between right and wrong is not as smudged as we want to believe and that right is worth standing for for its own sake - to escape it by giving the argument of it being inconsequential is to take the easy way out.

Nevertheless, the film also suggests a lighter hand, a patient, wise approach through Malko. Malko too is an idealist, but her idealism is tempered. She suggests to Newton - “Change takes time, jungle took years to grow.” Yes, that too, but the problem is that there is greater danger of cynicism creeping in over the years. Malko also poses this question - to all who care to listen - how well do we know this country. Newton has no clue, and Malko is used to this neglect, of this callous approach.

The writing and dialogues are taut and crisp. My favourite was when Newton questions, ‘Aap ashawadi hain yah nirashawadi?’ and Malko replies ‘Main aadivasi hoon’. Translating into English would rob the beautiful wordplay. The bit role by Sanjay Mishra too is a gem, especially the message he gives on the profound social impact of Isaac Newton’s work - it takes vision to understand past with such clarity. In fact the movie shows him to be the older version of Newton - one senses a natural connection between them. His argument that you are not doing a favour to the country by being sincere and honest, while resonating with Newton’s character, is at contrast with almost everything else in the movie. Converting name from Nutan to Newton established the anti-establishment nature of the central character brilliantly. Or the name of Aatma Singh - was he reflecting the true soul of this country which is cynical, and is Newton standing for something foreign to us?

I would not call out anybody’s acting in particular. Rajkumar Rao, though good, has done what he is easily capable of doing. He gives the automaton appearance, the restlessness, and the fire in the belly quite easily. Pankaj Tripathi too appears to be on easy ground here. But then again, all this is testimony to the skills of these actors.

The problems shown in the movie are wide, multifarious and messy - with long lineage. One can make many sequels or versions of such a movie, but still not achieve much more. At the end, the movie leaves thoughts and questions in your mind. The answers are tough, personal or non-existent.