Lessons from Barbenheimer

 The past week since 21/07/2023 has been one of high intensity debates, reviews, observations and fun activities revolving around two films - Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer and Greta Gerwig's Barbie. The word Barbenheimer, a portmanteau of the titles of the two films has been coined by by the internet to discuss and partake in the conversations around these two much anticipated films of the year! For me, these discussions triggered many points of self-realisation which were pretty unpleasant.

1. The idea of shallowness

I have never played with Barbie or any kind of dolls so in the stereotypical manner, long before I had read about the movie Barbie, I had decided not to see it because I believed that I was not shallow! Well, I was proved wrong when I read the reviews and saw how shallow I was in judging something that I did not even know of. Well, the shallowness that I had associated with Barbie was me in fact! 

2. The grand idea of 'Nolan'

Another stereotype that is cringeworthy is assuming that anything by Nolan is obviously woke! Well, it is! And Nolan is a great story-teller but to decide long before the release of the films, that I would watch Oppenheimer and not Barbie, goes to prove that my assumptions were coloured and biased. Well, I am ashamed!

But this trend is seen among many peers and fellow people! An assumption that anything associated with Barbie is shallow (pardon by repeated usage of the word!) and the colour pink is detestable but anything associated with Nolan has to be intelligent and deep!

Well, I guess a doll is shallow but an atom bomb is worth it if we go by the comparisons of the objects that these two films focus upon. At the end of the day, both cause destruction - dolls on the inside and bombs on the outside (and inside too) if you know what I mean!

I hope that many of us have decided to move on beyond our judgmental attitudes and view everything with an open and kind mind. Have you seen the films yet?

Picture credit 1: Internet

Picture credit 2 & 3: Wikipedia

Five seconds don't mean much

How long does it take to assess a person? I have read that in five seconds an impression is made. I cannot agree and neither do I agree with the cliched saying, 'First impression is the first impression.' Today I was introduced to someone while going for a walk. As soon as the first introductions were made, I could see the lady scrutinising me from top to bottom. I could sense that she was ass . . . essing me. I felt rather uncomfortable. Could she have gauged me just by looking at me. Did she sense that I was a corny blogger or for that matter that I didn't choose to bathe today?! Maybe not. What did she read of me when she looked at me from top to bottom. At that precise moment when she looked at me, I also judged her or rather ass . . . essed her. We were both doing the same things but I would like to be partial with my observation because it was the observation of an observation.

Often we are not open-minded enough to be compassionate and non-judgmental while meeting someone for the first time. Perhaps there is this notion that the other person might be judgmental of us and why not take the first step by judging them harshly and showing that through our facial expression. By experience and a bit of prudence, I have come to realise that first impressions don't mean much. A tough exterior can mask an insecure interior or a seemingly calm exterior might be vicious within. The phrase, 'Be Kind; Everyone You Meet is Fighting a Hard Battle' runs and reruns in mind when I find myself trying to judge a person in the first five seconds of meeting someone. Something related to this is falling in love at first sight. While I can possibly extend my general speculation to love, I will not venture that side because I have strongly felt attractions in the first five seconds of meeting someone. Well, can attraction be equivalent to judging, I don't know. Some things are mysterious and cannot be ascertained but I guess scientists have tried cracking the mystery of love at first sight and maybe they are right.

I think first meetings pave way for opening one's world to someone who is different, unacquainted and new from our world. After subsequent meetings, we can decide whether we want to stay or leave but that first time should be an open-minded one, I reckon.

Just because I write this, it doesn't mean that I'm open-minded. I am learning to rein my force of habit and trying to be open to the possibilities of a first meeting which could probably lead to some strong bonds and conversations.

What do you think of this preoccupation with first impressions?

Image 1: Internet
Image 2: Internet

Don't judge a person by the book he/she carries!

It's fine if we judge a book by its cover but the greatest folly would be to judge a person by the book she/he carries. Many of them carry books as an adornment that enhances their intellectual value. I have seen this especially in students who will go an extra mile to carry that copy of Heisenberg or Thoreau just for kicks and if one keenly observes the book will be carried in such a way that the name of the book and its author is clearly visible. Well, if one proceeds to ask them about the book, crisp sentences straight from Wikipedia will bewilder and amuse you.

Recently while on a train journey, a young man dug out a volume of a popular author's book and tried to start reading but at the second odd page, fell asleep. After that the book was neatly kept on the food tray throughout the 20 odd hours without even being touched. The man in question, of course was later wide awake and also enjoying a film on the Laptop of a fellow passenger. Okay, I'm not judging but then a book does increase the value of the individual who carries one. Now, you have to agree that if there are two persons and one has a book and the other has a computer, if you are like me, you would naturally like to start a conversation with the one who has the book. Books are great conversation starters and I am proud to say that one such book gave me a pen-friend to whom I've been writing for ten odd years now. Now before you get ideas, he is an ordained priest in the Roman Catholic church. The book in question was Antony de Mello's The Song of the Bird. I asked him what he was reading and then read a page, borrowed the book and now I even own a copy of the same book. Looking at that feeble man in the train, I could never decipher that he was such a treasure chest of knowledge. See so much for my judgment.

Reading and books have certainly become synonymous with something elite and erudite and hence many would love to be part of the circle. Please don't imagine that I am placing people who read books and certain authors on a pedestal. I also know that many a well-read individual can be an absolutely downright rascal as well. Books and knowledge and authors offer so many brownie points to people like us that the world seems different when in the company of a beautiful book. And moving around with such beauties sure increase the worth of the one carrying it. Now you understand why some deliberately walk around with Shakespeare and Darwin.

Well, have you seen books as exterior adornments meant to be showing off YOU? What are your thoughts on this?

Image 1: Internet
Image 2: Internet

Post Script: Now, don't ask me about people who do carry books but trashy ones such as  . . . And I think they are way better than those who do not read at all. Harsh, right?

Have you ever plotted anyone's murder?

Well, the title of this post can raise eye-brows and make the reader gasp saying, "How on earth?" But the truth is at some point there comes that one individual who induces us to plot his/her murder. I have thrice plotted a murder in my mind (but never ever had the courage to actually doing it). Most of us know the Ten Commandments and the commandment which says, "Thou shalt not kill." In spite of the commandment and inspite of knowing that no one has the right to take away another's life, the thought sometimes feels justified when certain actions of people are seen. 

The three murders that I have plotted in my mind, according to me, are justified because of the nature and deeds of the people involved. Now, I know that I am not the one to decide on anyone's right to live or die but the actions that were committed by the three are worthy enough to kill them. The three in question have a deep ability to hurt and upset not only me abut also many other individuals. Now, one doesn't plot the murder of every third person we know but only some who possess that potential weapon which can be used to upset the balance of life. 

While I write this post, I also understand the words, 'kindness,' 'compassion, and 'forgiveness.' Well, if I say that no matter how much I try to be kind and forgiving, the individuals just don't stop themselves from doing harm. So much so, my kindness is seen as weakness and an attitude which is not capable of standing up. 

Coming back to the "plotting murder" part, I have let myself have the luxury of taking cues of murder from the various books I've read and the many films I watched. And how juicily I try different ways to kill that special individual who has managed to incite so much anger and hate within me. Given my peace-loving disposition, it takes a person of great failings to drive me to think of murder. I have been saddened by my thoughts of plotting a murder to the extent that I have had doubts about my self but those doubts were laid to rest when certain other individuals also confessed having similar thoughts about people whom I would have liked to eliminate. 

The mind and imagination can go to any lengths in thinking and plotting and sometimes this license enables the individual to travel and explore the darker and unsought realms of fantasy. Afterall there is no ethics, punishment and judgment involved when it comes to imagination!

Do such sinister thoughts surprise you, my dear reader?

Image: Internet

P.S: I have done away with those plottings, as I seem to be tired of thinking about those three individuals. I'd rather think of exotic places, dark knights and fantastic blog posts!

Early risers and compulsive slogs

I do enjoy waking up early before the sun comes up to a quiet and chirpy morning. But alas! I cannot do it every morning or let's say most of the mornings. Well, I can if I want to but I just let myself sleep. I don't much try to make rising early a priority. But, I have seen that early risers always manage to get those Wow! glances and smiles of admiration. Nearly always. When someone rises early and breaks into a run and works out, there is a sense of awe over that individual. It almost seems that people who don't rise early are marginalised and seen as lazy. Every family lauds an early riser and those individuals are always set as shining examples of how life should be lived. Remember the saying: Early to bed and early to rise makes you healthy, wealthy and wise. But don't we all have our own body rhythms and cycles?!?

Now the same applies for those individuals who slog and slog, no matter how tired they are. Now it seems that these sloggers like to slog not because they are wired that way but because certain others are not wired that way. Do you get what I mean. Those who slog endlessly don't know what it means to spend a few minutes without doing something. They abhor idleness and also people who seem to be idle. And almost by default everyone who slogs is an early riser!!!

The world always favours the early risers and compulsive slogs or so it seems. Those who slog always find something to do and are seldom seen taking an afternoon siesta or prolonging a meal. I reckon that the slogging starts off in a very harmless manner and over a period of time becomes an identity. Compliments like, "G is always busy; K always finds something to do; O is never idle" lead the person who slogs to persevere slogging more enthusiastically. Don't they ever relish in just being rather than doing? Sadly, many women are the ones who get into this slogging mode and finally a day comes when they cannot manage and off they snap. But do they have a choice? And sadly, women are also the early risers.

Though I started this post to complain against the unfair means of judging people by the time they rise and the amount of work they do, I went off on a tangent. Well, I forgot to mention chronobiology but then I remember that I had written a post on that a long time ago.

So, are you a proud early riser who flaunts your sleeping habits or are you a poor morning person who sometimes wakes up early? Maybe you slog as well ;)

Image: Internet

Good stereotypes and bad stereotypes

We who think and act are aware that stereotypes exist in this world and that for almost everything there are stereotypes. But on further observation, I reckon that there are good and bad stereotypes. It is the so called 'bad' or 'negative' stereotypes that we should be wary of. Sometimes even the positive ones might land us into trouble.

Now what are the good or positive stereotypes? When we say that a people of certain community cook delicious food, we positively stereotype that community. We assume that every member of that community cook great food. But taking for granted that everyone in that community has to cook well is taking the assumption too far. You get what I mean? Sometimes it so happens that when we ask a member of that community to cook and that individual knows no cooking, then the stereotyping turns into shades of gray. In one film, I think, Freedom Writers, a teacher asks a young Afro-American girl to narrate her 'black experience.' But that girl hasn't experienced anything like that and is at a loss to explain what was asked. Here, the teacher takes it for granted that since the girl is coloured, she will be able to explain the 'black experience.' The girl is offended. Look what stereotypes could do! Now this is an example of a negative-positive stereotype.

Matters associated with beauty, art and specific techniques commonly classify under good stereotypes while certain peculiar habits, and their ilk are examples of bad stereotypes. What I understand is that stereotypes, either good or bad should be used in moderation. Sometimes even the good stereotyping can turn out to be premeditation of a particular person or community. Hence, I reckon that it is always best to restrain our preconceived notions about anything and anyone, otherwise we will lose the element of being surprised.

My dear readers, I know that you are wise enough not to stereotype, so please tell me what did you think about this post.

Image: Internet

What's your worth?

Clothes maketh a man says a popular adage but sometimes this adage is taken a bit too seriously by many merchandise sellers. Sales personnel at many retail outlets literally try to guess the worth of the customer by the way he/she is dressed. Now, don't get me wrong here. I am not propagating shabby dressing sense or pleading the cause of people dressed carelessly. I am just trying to say that a person should not always be judged by the manner of dressing. Some people just don't care about their dressing. Period. Take this professor who is my colleague. He is an intelligent academic scholar who is well read and quite quirky as well. He has his own eccentricities like we all do and can be a perfect illustration of an 'absent-minded professor.' Once he happened to visit a popular upmarket book-store and at the entrance, he was warned, All the books here are very expensive. Well, the security would have no idea that the person in question holds a PhD from one of the most prestigious institution in the country. All that mattered was that the professor was dressed quite shabbily.

A person's worth is determined by his/her clothes. And, if one is not well dressed then it is assumed that the person cannot afford 'decent' clothes and hence a poor man. Well, if that that is the case then is monetary worth determined only by the appearance? History records that many geniuses never cared about their presentation in public: unkempt hair, dirt-filled nails, different footwear for each leg, button-less shirts and an open fly.

Having said all this, I would also hasten to add that it is quite impossible to blame the security as he with his limited knowledge of the world matches the outward appearance and the monetary worth. His world is limited to the equation: money=well-dressed and poverty=shabby clothes. He cannot estimate that sometimes there are also individuals who do not care about how they look for their mind is preoccupied with things that are far more important to then than smart dressing.

And, I also don't negate the fact that well-dressed people do have an edge in this world which gives importance to sheen and outward looks. Afterall, Clothes maketh a man in the world and Bacon's Reading maketh a full man is only limited to certain circles.

So, what is your take on this. Do you make first impressions based on clothes or do you wait before arriving at a conclusion?

Image 1: Internet
Image 2: Internet

LaBels limit me but save time!

Sometimes for want of a better word and saving time and energy, we resort to already existing labels. In the process of using a particular label frequently, we deny ourselves the opportunity to think beyond that particular word. Conveniently we slot people, objects, places and other things. Therefore it requires a feminist to point out and condemn labels that define women, are sexist. If not for them, we could not have realized that we are slotting women into a particular category.

Just take a look around you and you find that there are labels for almost everything. It is these labels that slowly make way for prejudices and stereotypes. Spaces have to be either urban or rural/country side. But most of the times we use labels just because we can’t think of any other word. Most of the times, these labels are also historical and sociological. Things are simplified for historians and sociologists if groups of people are slotted into a particular label.

In academics, one can observe this trait predominantly. If an individual gets slotted into a particular label, then that one remains with him/her throughout the career span. Even if the individual has changed loyalties and prescribes to another, the tag is sure to follow. It is therefore quite difficult to remain in the academic circle and not be labelled. These labels can sometimes be the area of an individual’s research. For example, if someone is passionate about the theory of post colonialism, then he/she is labeled a poco (short form for postcolonialist). Unwittingly, one gets pulled into the vortex of labels.

Labels can be limiting and suffocating. I am trying to think an alternate to this. I cannot seem to find any. Perhaps, you could suggest something. I would like to read what you have to say on this. 

Image: Internet

No No No

Now I know how wrong I was to judge Amy Winehouse's music by looking at her personhood. I had always associated her music to be dark, meaningless and that of just another dope singer on the block. Looking at her bee-hive hairstyle and rehab stories, I couldn't make myself think that she could produce good music. All the while, I had made these judgments without having listened to her music. The smallness of my personhood comes through examples as these.

After her untimely death, there were many reviews which chose to focus only on the '27 Club' and not her soulful music or her voice. But there was one review which piqued my interest towards Winehouse. I read that obituary quite carefully and the writer, though mentioned the 27 Club, did not choose to make that his sole point of reference to Winehouse. The way he described her voice and range, could have forced anyone to go and listen to her albums. I don't know whether others did that but I precisely did that: listening to different songs by Winehouse. I started with Rehab, which faintly reminded me of CCR's "Someone told me long ago/There's a calm before the storm,/I know" from the song Have you ever seen the rain?. I liked the feel of Winehouse's Rehab. I listened to all of her songs that were on You tube and boy, here was a fan of Winehouse's voice.

Well, I don't much listen to songs by girls/women, as they are mostly mushy love songs with a voice that drips honey and sweetness. Of course, there are some exceptions to this and Winehouse was one who did not have a stereotypical voice (wiki tells me that she possesses deep contralto vocals). Now I feel sorry that the world lost someone as her at so young a age. If she was alive, there would have been many soulful songs that would fill the idle hours of many souls like me.

I should leave this judging business, otherwise I will lose out on many things. What say?

Image: Internet

A conversation . . .

I don’t know how this experience will affect me but I know that it has touched me. For the first time in my life, I had a conversation with someone who was a bit soft in the head. She was smiling to herself and seated on the row of chairs arranged for passengers to sit. I was waiting for my train to arrive. I was travelling alone to Chennai. I sat down beside her. She looked intently at me and exclaimed: “You look very beautiful.” I smiled. She lovingly caressed my left cheek and again said: “You are a beauty —calm and quiet. You smell very good. I like the way you look and smell.” I again smiled at the obvious admiration. I still did not think she was mad.


Then she asked me about my education. I struggled to tell her as I was not sure if she would understand. I anyway told her. She smiled and said: “You are very intelligent. I am not. But I have mingled with many people like you and a bit of their intelligence has rubbed off on me.” I patiently listened. She went on: “I know many wise people like you. What I know is nothing. My knowledge is but a drop.”

She told me that I reminded her of a person she used to know who also quite beautiful and smelled good like me. She looked at me intently and smiled. Then she started talking non-stop about the entire pantheon of Hindu goddesses and how we should not burden the earth. It was only then I started feeling a bit uncomfortable as I wished to be with myself. She talked and talked and when I did not respond by saying ‘yes,’ she would force a ‘yes’ from me. I was a bit reluctant to continue sitting there.

From then on started my meanderings on madness. She seemed much wiser than many common people. Her examples and diction were impeccable (in Tamil). Was she mad? By the standards of the world, yes but otherwise . . . I don’t know.

What makes someone mad? There are degrees, I presume. I might be saner than X but less sane than Y. Is there madness in everyone? Maybe . . .

Have you pondered on madness? Do you think that you might be mad in some way? Maybe . . .

My photograph is a liar

Attributing human qualities to inanimate objects reflects the literature background of the one writing. Have you ever heard this: "When I saw your picture, I thought you were blah blah blah but when I am talking to you, it is a contradiction." Boo. Now this statement mildly irritates me. Judging and second guessing the person's traits from the image. It happens all the time. Now even psychologists assert that within five minutes of seeing a photograph, the individual is judged and discerned. NO. It cannot happen. Based on experiences and previous analysis, one often tries to dissect the image and perceive it. Well, the perceived becomes the real until (I don't know when).

I am guilty of this as well. "Well, he looks arrogant," "She looks like an angel" -- The first judgment is on the characteristics and the second is based on looks. The first one can be wrong and the second one, I don't know. Why is that every time we seek to fence and border one's personality based on images, looks and voice. I might look absolutely adorable in a photograph but in reality I can be someone who is quite adorable but with shades of gray! Now does that qualify as adorable?

The 'About Me' column is another shade of the image. Again judgments are made reading the 'About Me' column and probably that is why many individuals don't mind writing and filling up those columns. You may say that it is my perception that images are often projections but not reality. Maybe. In a certain frame of mind even I would take that position. But not today.

So all said and done, my photograph is a liar or perhaps it is but a partial truth to the real me.

Image courtesy: Internet