DISCLAIMER
the mind is impressionable, heart is impressionistic and words are intended to create an impression

Monday, August 9, 2010

To My Daughter


“How the stars made?

nd how grass grows

so tall? Tell me papa

Cause u ave lived

nd u know all.”


“It’s a funny world Navvya

For years we live

Knowing nothing at all

Neither today

Nor years hence


I can tell you, how

grass shoots up straight

Story of how stars

were made and trivia

around us sprayed…


But I do not know

The truth and

live years in

the loop of

honourable dark.


Do not learn

from me doll.

Weave your own truth

And maybe at the end

You will have lived.”

Sunday, August 8, 2010

सपने का जन्म



वो अन्दर था 
जब हम पत्थर
बजा रहे थे
त्रिश्नाएं वो  
बटोर रहा था
जब घास हम 
सुलगा रहे थे 
विछेद रहा था
असंभव, वो  
जोड़ रहा था
अद्भुत

कई साल तक
हम आग 
सुलगते रहे
वो रहा
अन्दर गुम

फिर एकदिन
उसकी रचना,
थी तैयार
सपना उसदिन
हमने देखा
जो कुछ भी
हाथ में था
गिर गया
जो बरसों से
नहीं जली थी
उसदिन
वो आग
भभक उठी 

January 32


‘Why this date?'

‘You won’t understand’

says your smile

‘That’s my day, or

will be…,’ you add

with stylish silence.

With him the jazz

doesn’t help,

‘Whaayyy?’ he’s earnest.

‘We all do it,

Mine is a date.’

‘But its never coming!’

‘It always is,

wooling winters

with anticipation

then summers silently

sweltering in disappointment.’

He throws up his hands.

He won’t last long.

‘But you see,’

you tell him,

‘Jan 33 will last forever.’

‘What is forever?

…,’ you miss the rest

then something

you let slip

is not heard either.

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Pathetic fallacy?



Clap and snap,

then countless snaps

Snaps, dampening

the clothes she

set out to dry,

she thinks they

don’t mind though.

Another day

The snaps would

have annoyed,

but not today.

They always

mess the doorbell

but today, it’s

a naughty tickle,

‘What a pathetic

laugh’, she giggles .

Its all different,

They would’ve

snaked through

her skin and

sickened her soul

but not today.

‘There is no reason

for most of the

things in life,’

she says,

‘We just invent it.’

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

हममे कुछ नया नहीं



और ना ही हो सकता है
उस आदम से
इस मानुस तक
हमने यही किया है
और ताज्जुब है
हरबार सोचा की
कुछ नया किया है
फिर एक दिन
उस सच से
होता है साक्षात्कार
की ये तो नया
है ही नहीं
और तब होती है
जंग शुरू,
सच बनाम विश्वास.
उस संकट में
काम आते है
बड़े बड़े नाम
बताइए एइन्स्तिएन
ने नया नहीं किया?
बताइए जो पहले
चाँद पे गया, क्या
उसने भी नया नहीं किया.
पर सच
जवाब नहीं देता
सच तो बस
होता है
आप खुद ही
वितर्क खोजते हैं
जो खोजते है तो
तर्क को भी
आस पास ही पाते हैं
अंततः अपनी जिरह में
आप हरा देते हैं
खुद को
और वो सच
भाग निकलता है
छुपता फिरता है
सालों तक
तर्कों की पुलिस से
फिर होता है प्रदर्पित
जब आप किसी
चोटी पे खड़े
कर रहे होते है
सीना चौड़ा
और दोहराता है
वही सालों पुरानी बात
'इसमें नया क्या है'?

कैसा हो अगर
खो जाये
हम सबकी याददाश्त?
हर किताब जल जाये
हर अक्षर मिट जाये?
तब सब नया लगेगा
शायद.
इसीलिए मैं
मंदबुद्धि होना चाहती हूँ
सब हो चूका है
इस निष्कर्ष को
खोना चाहती हूँ.

Wednesday, April 14, 2010

So Quiet!


But its too quiet

for sanity

too many words

imprisoned in paper,

too many thoughts

bottled up in a brain,

too many lonely smiles

for solitude,

too much of me and

too much of them

too little of us.

Too much peace

to be at peace.















Wednesday, October 14, 2009

THE GROUND BENEATH HER FEET-SALMAN RUSHDIE

Sometimes prejudice can harbinger delight and surprise. I began reading The Ground Beneath Her Feet to find reasons to dislike Rushdie but by the end I am glad I found out why Rushdie deserves the hype that surrounds him.

The Ground Beneath Her Feet is indeed a work of great art though, with visible fault lines. The novel works on epic proportions. The Orpheus-Eurydice myth is culled into modern set up of pop-stars but that’s to say the least.

Rushdie is a great prose –stylist. He works carefully to create a pattern of life. Sometimes though, especially in the first half, the seams of his workmanship are visible. The art does not look effortless. Also restraint is not one of his gifts, at least not in this book. So the narrative gets cumbersome and repetitive and characters begin to look like caricatures. But he makes up for these flaws eventually.

His characters which at one time are exposed to the risk of appearing stock-types, emerge as strong and causative elements in the novel. He throws into the arena a Greek-God-style hero (Ormus), a modern-style anti-hero (Vina) and a single-man chorus (Umeed). The result is marvelous. Ormus has the gift of foresight and vision of the other-world while Vina has the sheer force of her personality and talent. Amind these two greats, Umeed hangs on to his human desires.

Love and art are the two main chords that run through the novel. The writer himself seems to be in the process of discovery in these two matters. He keeps conclusions open. The Ormus-Vina love has all that goes into being great, yet the author allows himself to question, almost mock this greatness.

Aloud I say, You know Vina, I don’t really get it. I never have. The way you two are together. How does that work exactly.?

She laughs. Higher love, she answers. Love on a higher level. Just think of it like that. Like exaltation.

Sexuality is a key element in the relationships throughout the novel. While Ormus, maintains a ‘purity’ by not taking any partners other than Vina, she on the other hand refuses to be bound to one and is open about it. Rushdie comes very close to creating the real life pop celebrities of genius, controversies and trademark eccentricities. Vina reverses the man-woman equation:

We, Ormus and I, we were her women: he , the loyal wife standing by her philandering husband, settling for him in spite of his roving eye, his wanderlust; and I, the simultaneous wanton and long-suffering mistress, taking what I could get.

Sexuality is inextricably mingled with love. The story muses about the perfect recipe for love but leaves the puzzled unsolved. On a similar note the 'art and virtuosity' equation is explored. After the final exit of Vina it seems impossible that she can be replaced as Ormus’ muse, but Rushdie dares to replace her with Mira, perhaps indicating a continuity in art irrespective of individuals involved.

One can point to number climaxes in the novel, which contributes to the sense of constant build-up and pace. One of the most surprising climaxes is where a raving Ormus, unable to accept the death of, Vina suddenly declares the advent of new in the form of Mira after the first concert.

“Vina Apsara? Oh, I’m sorry she died.”

For this moment it seems art is bigger than love, however, Rushdie drives carefully between the narrative and allows Ormus to fade for love though his art is shown to be finally free of Vina.

Rushdie brews his magic-realism on a recipe far different from that of Marquez. While Marquez’s magic slips in quietly, inconspicuous even to the reader, Rushdie makes magic as visible and baffling as in real life. However a reader would relate more to Marquez’s characters than that of Rushdie’s. Rushdie’s world is populated by unusual, curious characters. Yet gifted and surrounded by unusual, their fate is compelling and involving.