Desicritics Reviews

Risk Manager Role With Afghanistan International Bank

Dr Bhaskar Dasgupta — Thu, 8 Jan 2009 00:45:09 EST

Sometime in the dim and distant past, I had registered myself with an India based job site. This was when my father was ill, and I was considering moving back to India. Anyway, I had forgotten all about it, till today when this email landed in my inbox.

Post Title: Risk Manager
Organization: Afghanistan International Bank
Location: Kabul - Afghanistan
Duration: Permanent
No. of Post: 1
Sex: Any
Nationality Any
Salary: 4000 US $ p.m.+ accommodation + travel+ other benefits.
Background: Afghanistan International Bank (AIB), a commercial bank incorporated in Afghanistan and managed according to international best practices is looking for an experienced Risk Manager for its Head Office in Kabul.
Job Summary: Overall Job Purpose:
Due to rapid expansions of its business and operations the banking is looking for a Risk Manager. The position allows the successful candidate to be part of the senior management team of the bank and play a major role in its continued development.
The successful candidate will be expected to build a risk monitoring systems complying with Basel II requirements thus additional experience in market and operational risk management will be a distinct advantage.
Priority will be placed on credit management and the successful candidate will have had experience in:
1. â€¢ Credit Policies & Procedures
a. Credit policy, review and development
b. Acquisition or development of decision support tools for commercial and retail credit
c. Risk rating framework review
d. Underwriting standards development
2. â€¢ Risk Asset Review
a. Review of individual credit risk ratings
b. Credit quality assessments
3. â€¢ Portfolio Management Unit
a. Profitability and risk analysis
b. Pricing policy
c. Develop predictive dynamic monitoring
Qualification â€¢ Master degree
â€¢ Minimum 10 years experience directly related to risk management where at least 5 years in senior risk management capacity.
â€¢ Fully functional in monitoring of documentation, portfolios & exposure limits of the bank.
â€¢ Excellent analytical, creativity and problem solving skills.
â€¢ Posses good presentation and organizational skills.
Interested candidates can send their CVs with recent photo to this address:

Few thoughts crossed my mind.

The package is a bit low for what is a hardship posting for international bankers, so I am curious to know why would they have selected that compensation level.
Its an interesting job all right, but very ambitious. Candidates for this role with the required background and experience will be relatively few globally.
But it is good to read that they are aggressive, and I wish them luck with their hiring.
I researched the bank on the net and I was not really that comfortable to see that the address of the bank related to some house. Here is the address: House no. 1608 Behind Amani High School Wazir Akbar Khan, Kabul. Reminded me of the addresses I would see in the tiny lanes old Bhopal.
One of the unsung success stories in Afghanistan is the steady development of the banking system. Considering that the Mullah's had effectively eviscerated the banking system, in a matter of 5 months, they have passed a series of banking laws, have presence of many international and local incorporated banks, got some good governmental backing from the Ministry of Finance.
Here is an interesting Afghan review report for the IMF. Gives you hope, no? and no, I am not suffering from the curse of low expectations. Give the country a break, it is starting from near zero.

I further quote some numbers on how Afghanistan has progressed since 2001 from this speech. (even though the verbiage could be a bit optimistic and is after all, coming from a US State Department Employee, the figures, even if adjusted, are noteworthy).

Reconstruction and development work remains on track in most of the country and the Afghan economy continues to grow at impressive rates, with licit Gross Domestic Product more than doubling since 2002. Thanks in large part to our colleagues in the U.S. Government, the lives of millions of Afghans have improved considerably: In 2001, just 8 percent of Afghans had access to some form of healthcare; now, more than 80 percent of the population has access to medical care. Almost 11,000 medical professionals have been trained. More than 680 hospitals and clinics have been built and outfitted. For the first time in 10 years, the grain harvest was sufficient to meet consumption needs inside Afghanistan. In 2001, 900,000 children – mostly boys – were enrolled in school; now, there are more than 5 million and more than 1.5 million of these (34%) are girls and young women. Since 2001, there has been a 22 percent decline in mortality rates for infants and children under 5 years of age – we are saving 85,000 more young lives every year. Two years ago only 35 percent of children were being inoculated against the polio virus. Now more than 70 percent of the population – including 7 million children – are inoculated. In 2001, there was a dysfunctional banking system. Now, Afghanistan has a functioning Central Bank with more than 30 regional branches and an internationally-traded currency. There are now 3 mobile telephone companies serving over 3.5 million subscribers – this is almost 11 percent of the population. In 2001, there were 50 kilometers of paved roadway in the country, now there are more than 4000 kilometers of paved roads.

The main thing which struck me was the sheer banality and normality of this advertisement. A very small thing, but something which gave confidence to me that Afghanistan is improving little by little, despite all the gruesome news coming out of Afghanistan and all the efforts by the Taliban to drag that benighted country back into the medieval ages. Sometimes, its good to see the good side of the story as well. I can only wish the country the best of luck and here's hoping that the Taliban are defeated. And if it keeps on hiring professionals of the type in the advertisement, it can only get better.

PS: then I read something like this and feel very depressed.

Technorati Tags: Afghanistan,Banking,Risk Management

Film Review: Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi

Blokesablogin — Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:49:24 EST

Earlier reviews kept me from watching this film. However, my innate liking for anything SRK (since Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman) got me watching it. Man, was I shocked to see SRK in such a dorky, nerdy get up? He was so yuck in the first scene where he meets the heroine at her marriage to someone else that I almost walked out! Certainly a big gamble even for someone who could afford to take such a "personable" risk.

The story however won me over. I suppose having experienced an arranged marriage myself, the subtle charm of the film appealed to me. I doubt many of us have buffed up men for husbands. Most are of the Suri variety- sincere blokes working hard, uninspired in an office to bring home a paycheck.

My dad was one and so were so many of my uncles and other friends. They never really professed their love for their wives, but they were most sincere in their regard for their spouses. There were not necessarily "romantic" gestures that included roses or dancing, but it would be remembering a quirky trait like samosas from a certain shop and they getting it for their wives! My husband would be the first one to ask me if I wanted to go see the latest SRK flick as he was introduced to my liking his films when we got married! Thankfully, SRK is aging right along with me! LOL!

The beauty lies in the romantic fantasy of our heroine who finds herself married to such a dork owing to contrived circumstances. She feels her entire life is shattered. All the laughter and joy simply fades away only to slowly spark back to life when confronted with a dance contest. The dance contest turns the story around as it does SRK's appearance- phew, good that I did not walk out!

The male Cinderella act reminds you of Cyrano de Bergerac wooing his beloved through his friend with the "pretty" visage. Here, our hero transforms himself, Cinderella style, to dance with his beloved. In a thread I read, how come the wife does not recognize the husband sans moustache? Simple actually, she rarely looks at her husband!

Therein lies the crux of the story- our heroine's dreams become reality in this out of the ordinary experience of dance contests and stage outfits. When this buffed up avatar of her staid husband suggests that she elope with him, she is rudely awakened from her reverie. She realizes that dreams are to be cherished as a "break" from the humdrum but cannot replace reality.

In a modern world that questions the social relevance of marriage, this film certainly looks deeper into the construct of the commitment that marriage is. It may not be of great appeal to those who prefer the freedom of live-ins. The way our heroine assumes her role as housewife- making the lunch box and handling all the cooking and cleaning speaks much of lower middle class India and its inherent value system and certainly will not win feminist votes.

The choice of a B grade town like Amritsar for the setting was inspired. This story can happen in Benaras, in Thanjavur, in Puri, in Ajmer, but not in the metros- they have a very different "ethos" and definitely will be missing the overt spiritual component.

This movie also made me think of marriage from the perspective of a shy male. I once went through this amazing workshop that made us go through ten main archetypes of the feminine that included the princess, the mother, the virgin and the enchantress. In a telling scene, the husband disguised as our macho hero asks what girls really want. And the wife simply answers that it is to know that they are loved like no other. Of course, how could any woman not lose her heart to a man who goes to such lengths to woo and adore her?!

The film forces the male to enact archetypes to identify what works to make his beloved fall in love with him. Being "Indian", the "spiritual" archetype wins hands down (not necessarily a Western archetype!). Had this film been about a hindu, I would not have been surprised to see Hanuman ji as the patron lord to deliver our Ram, his Sita!

While the short timeline of the film forces the love to be expressed quickly, I know that it is an experience that simply keeps welling in a quiet manner. After 15 years of marriage, I can only say there is more love today than a year ago- if something like that can be quantified. Each passing moment gets us to recognize yet another quirk in each other and learning to live with it. Even an earlier "irritable" habit becomes an endearing one later! It sort of defines the person.

The music score by Salim-Sulaiman was typical Punjabi balle-balle style- enthusiastic and danceable. The new girl, Anushka Sharma looks totally Punjabi- a very successful Raveen Tandon look.

Well worth a "dekho" and will not be surprised if the DVD gets gifted around for wedding anniversaries.

Book Review: Vishnu's Crowded Temple: India Since the Great Rebellion by Maria Misra

Vinod Joseph — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 12:18:15 EST

Having liked Maria Misra’s first book on managing agencies so much, I got hold of her second and much more recent one, a couple of weeks ago. In Vishnu’s Crowded Temple, Misra undertakes the challenging task of analysing India’s history from the time immediately after the mutiny (1857) till the present. Misra proves herself equal to the challenge. Her 450 odd page tome is not only a very thorough examination of India’s history during this period, it is also crammed with Misra’s analysis of the prominent events and personalities. Irrespective of whether you agree or disagree with Misra’s various assessments, you can’t help appreciating that Misra knows her history very well and has all relevant facts at her finger tips.

Misra’s stand out achievement in this book is in examining every issue from multiple points of view. For example, when discussing partition, she explains how each of the actors, the Congress, the Muslim League and the British, performed their roles and did what they did in a manner that is entirely comprehensible, though with the benefit of hindsight, many serious mistakes were made. Equally brilliant are Misra’s description of the Emergency and the raise of Hindu nationalism in the 1990s. The personalities of Gandhi, Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Laloo Prasad Yadav, V.P. Singh and Mayawati are dispassionately analysed and laid bare. Their contributions to India are examined ruthlessly without any drama. Also of great interest (to me at least) was Misra’s examination of the (failed) attempts to have a Uniform Civil Code for India and to make Hindi India’s national language.

Misra’s language is simple, to the point, non-melodramatic, slightly sarcastic at times and in short, it’s just right for a book of this sort. For example, while describing the Congress’s (unsuccessful) attempt to remain uncorrupted and keep India unified as it neared the goal of Independence, she says, ‘By the end of the 1930s, it was clear that much of Congress politics was fast degenerating in an unedifying scramble for the spoils of office. Gandhi had not woven the tough, rough-textured and inclusive fabric he had originally designed. Rather, the Congress nation was silk not khadi. Threads from the prosperous peasantry, urban petty bourgeoisie, the progressive intelligentsia and big business had somehow been woven into a single cloth. But it was distinctly frayed at the edges. Skeins of regional, Muslim and low caste politics hung loose and it would prove difficult, if not impossible, to weave these back into a united and independent Indian nation.

Cricket does not find a mention in the post-independence part of this book and neither does Bollywood, though Sholay is discussed as are film actors turned politicians MGR and NT Rama Rao. The implied assessment here, I assume, is that neither Bollywood nor cricket has influenced post-independence India. In a sense, I would agree with Misra that Bollywood is not as much of a nation unifier as it is hyped out to be. For example, people in Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh enjoy Bollywood movies though anti-India feeling runs high in these countries. Cricket does bring Indians together and alleged Muslim support for the Pakistani team is the cause of much tension and quarrel. I do wish Misra had commented on the impact of cricket on Indian society.

Misra makes a few minor mistakes which do not have any impact on the overall quality of this book. She says that A.O. Hume, the founder of the Indian National Congress was an Englishman (when he was actually Scottish). The Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) is translated as “Dravidian Forward Federation”, something which will bring a smile to any Tamil speaker. In my opinion, it ought to be the “Dravidian Upliftment Party”.

Misra’s book has a very detailed bibliography. Since I am not a qualified historian, I am not going to comment on it.

Misra ends her book with the story of how Laloo Yadav, long considered a maverick and joker, reformed the Indian railways and made it profitable. However, Laloo has no qualms about having his in-laws travel ticketless in a first class railway compartment. Misra tells us in the epilogue that her objective was to explain India’s peculiar form of modernity, one which is a mix of so many contradictions. I would say that Misra has admirably succeeded in her endeavour.

I am setting out here a few of Misra’s theories and assessments which I found to be interesting and a few facts I ‘discovered’ from this book, which the average desi doesn’t easily get to read elsewhere.

Impact of British Rule: The role of the British on the subcontinent should not be exaggerated. According to Misra, the subcontinent is too vast and too ancient and the British presence too brief and microscopic to be seen as a leading player. Initially I shook my head in disbelief, but then as I thought about this, I started to feel that Misra might have a point. However, this is a very moot point on which it will be possible to canvass a variety of views.

Caste: Till the British arrived, Indian society was very fluid. Castes were not frozen. However, the British found it easy to understand the Varna system as hard and fast. Also, the educated Brahmins were the ones the British turned to for tutorials on India. It made sense for the Brahmins to explain the caste system in such a way that they were on top, though in reality, the intermediate castes were the property owners and the generally, especially in southern India, the most powerful. Misra says that there’s a great deal to be said for the view that untouchability was an institution initially confined to some locations. As India industrialised, the poorest and lowest castes migrated to the cities where they did the dirtiest jobs and the stigma of untouchability grew.

Aryan Invasion Theory and Pre-Aryan Dravidian Utopia: The Aryan invasion theory came into vogue between 1901 and 1911. The proponents of this theory found it very convenient to explain the caste system and the hierarchy within. Soon census takers were carrying ‘nose callipers’ to measure the length of Indian noses and categorise people. The Theosophists propagated the Aryan invasion theory and the upper castes gratefully seized upon it to show that they were superior to other Indians and were linked to Europeans. Please note that Misra does not at any point express her own view on the Aryan invasion theory. I wish she had.

In the south, a British preacher Robert Caldwell pioneered the study of southern languages. Caldwell wanted to destroy the influence of corrupt priests and Brahmins in order to make conversions easy. For this, he propagated the view that the Aryan invasion had destroyed a pre-Aryan Dravidian utopia and that southern languages are totally autonomous from Sanskrit and Hindi. Tamil intellectuals accepted Caldwell’s theories, though they did not convert. They also took them further by saying that pre-Aryan Tamil possibly existed prior to the movement of the tectonic plates when Asia, Africa and Australasia was a unified landmass called ‘kumarikantam.’

Changing British attitudes to India and Indians: Prior to the mutiny, the British wanted to modernise and reform India. After the mutiny, the British only wanted to preserve the existing order, and use it to strengthen their own presence in India. The British set up a College of Arms which would produce for various Indian princes various assorted ensigns, emblems and other signs of power. The Statutory Civil Service was an attempt to make bureaucrats out of the scions of Indian aristocracy. Sons of Princes were enrolled in this service as a birth right and trained to be bureaucrats in order to avoid having middleclass Indians rule India through the Indian Civil Service. Colleges such as the Mayo College at Ajmer, modelled on Eton, were established. This attempt ended in a dismal failure since Indian princes were too much fun loving and lacked the necessary discipline to become mandarins.

British attitudes to different Indian ethnic groups is one of the topics covered in Misra’s first book. Misra takes up the same topic in this book as well. The Afridis, Dogras and Sikhs were believed to make good soldiers, since they physically resembled Europeans more than other Indians. Sikhs especially were the apples of the British eye. The British were so keen to keep the Sikhs pure that Sikh recruits to the army had to be baptised, have uncut hair, bangles, a dagger and have ‘Singh’ as the last name. The British maintained Sikhism in the army at a standard higher than it was elsewhere. Bengalis were considered effeminate and non-martial, though they had formed the bulk of the British Indian army prior to the mutiny. It was only during the Second World War that stereotypes such as these were abandoned.

The British also condemned many communities as criminal classes. In the south, the British started to prop up the Dravidian parties to fight the Brahmin dominated Congress. Reservations were made for non-Brahmin communities. British - Hindu – Muslim relations: Misra devotes a lot of time and space to explain how Hindu and Muslims came to be poles apart. Initially, the British were very tolerant of Hinduism. This morphed into contempt. With regard to Islam, the British were closer to the Muslims till the mutiny, after which there was a period of bitterness. Later, the British grew to develop cordial relations with a few select Muslims, like Syed Ahmed Khan, who benefitted a lot from their closeness to the British. Such select Muslims got British largesse and protection from Hindu domination, as the British played one community against the other. The bulk of the funding for the Aligarh University came from the British

Occasional Hindu-Muslim violence did take place in the 19th century, but such violence was local. In 1809, there were riots in Banares. British reports classified these as religious violence that erupted when a Muharram procession insulted Hindus, though in reality it was the result of a land dispute.

Till the early 19th century, Hindus and Sunnis celebrated Muharram along with the Shias. Similarly, Muslims participated in Ramlila celebrations. Towards the end of the 19th century, Tilak started to promote the Ganapati festival and made it a lavish and public affair. With that, Muharram processions and Ramlila festivities ceased to attract people from other faiths.

Regionalism among Indian leaders: At the Indian National Congress’s Lahore session in 1893, the great leader Bal Gangadhar Tilak boarded and lodged with his fellow Maharashtrians Gokhale and Ranade who were moderates and his ideological adversaries since he didn’t want to mix with Bengali leaders who subscribed to his own extremist views. South Indian leaders, almost entirely Brahmins, were fussy eaters and would not eat with others.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa, a leader of Hindu renaissance in the 1870s, attracted the cream of Bengal’s intelligentsia and preached the rejection of western values and advocated a return to a rustic lifestyle. He was a gender bender who liked to dress as a woman and flirt with his largely male followers, at times sitting on their laps. Keshub Chandra Sen was a westernised Brahmo Samaj leader who reverted to Hinduism under Ramakrishna Paramahamsa’s influence. Ramakrishna Paramahamsa advocated child marriage and Keshub Chandra Sen gave his 9 year old daughter in marriage to the ruler of Cooch Behar

Fitness First

Since the British were busy portraying upper caste Hindus as non-martial and effeminate, the Hindu renaissance brought in its wake a great deal of interest in exercise and fitness. Various akharas were started. Wrestling became a favourite pastime for many Indians. The great Indian wrestler Gama was said to live entirely on milk, ghee and almonds which he consumed in vast quantities. These were supposed to be all that was needed to make a man strong.

Max Muller was a German orientalist who promoted the theory of the noble Aryan race which migrated to India and from whom the upper castes were said to have descended. The Aryans were said to have founded in India the greatest civilisation the world has ever known, though they weakened themselves by marriages with the lower castes. Muller opposed woman’s liberation which he said would weaken the fabric of Indian society.

Bankim Chandra used to be a proponent of women’s rights, till he took a sharp U turn. After his change of mind, he went about advocating that women should not behave like babus. He advised such women to rid the earth of their useless weight by applying ropes to their necks.

The Age of Consent Bill: In 1891, the Age of Consent Bill was proposed after many child brides died after sex with their husbands. This bill made intercourse with a child below the age of 12 years statutory rape even if the girl was married to the accused. Bankim Chandra opposed this bill tooth and nail. He said that if this bill was passed “Bengal would be plagued with females in groups hanging from door to door, begging men to gratify their lust”. Many Indian dailies opposed the Bill. Anand Baraz Patrika changed from a weekly to a daily to meet increased subscriber demand. The Bangabani saw its subscription soar to 20,000, whilst Sanjivani which supported the bill had only 4,000 readers. Bal Gangadhar Tilak too opposed the Age of Consent Bill.

Aurobindo Ghose was a Hindu revivalist and Swaraj advocate who studied at St. Paul’s and Cambridge. He advocated revolutionary violence though his goals were quite vague. He talked about the golden age of the Vedas and declared that his ultimate objective was the ‘Aryanisation’ of the world

Annie Besant was a Theosophist who believed that high caste Hindus were Aryans who ought to be given the power to unify India as they had done earlier. She had a controversial attitude to non-Brahmins. She wanted to “humanise them because, as in Britain, the lower classes are a menace to civilisation and undermine the fabric of society.”

The Gurgaon experiment: Frank Bryne was a civil servant who carried out an experiment in Gurgaon to change the ‘bad’ habits of the Indian peasantry who were given to idleness and filth. To fight idleness, he made them give up canal irrigation and switch to inefficient Persian wheels. To make them conserve fuel, he promoted a magic ‘Bhoosa’ box. For disciplined defecation and fighting filth, he got them to dig latrines, though the latrines became traps for mosquitoes. Though none of his experiments really worked, a few successful monsoons meant that Gurgaon showed progress. Bryne’s books became standard texts for Indian bureaucrats.

Bombay Pentangular: So named for the five religious communities who took part, namely the Parsis, Hindus, Muslims, Europeans and the rest. In the initial days of this tournament, the Parsis refused to play the Hindus since they thought only the British were their equals. In 1939 the Hindus won the tournament and their supporters sang the Bande Mataram, which the Muslims found offensive.

Congress’s Hindu tilt and rift with the Muslim League: On many occasions Misra says that, at its lower echelons, the Congress was very much Hindu nationalist. Membership of the RSS and Congress overlapped to a considerable degree. Hedgewar, the founder of the RSS was a disciple of the Congress leader Tilak. From the 1920s , there was practically no Muslim participation in Congress led agitations. The 1930 civil disobedience movement which led to a sharp fall in the demand for imported fabrics, disproportionately affected Muslims, since most importers of foreign cloth were Muslims. Misra blames the Congress for breaching its relations with the Muslim League. Jinnah was willing to renounce his demand for separate Muslim electorates if the Congress would agree to more Muslim majority provinces in Sindh and the North West Frontier Province. The Congress refused. In the 1937 provincial elections, the Muslim League cooperated with the Congress, but the Congress reneged on a deal to share ministerial posts.

Frontier Gandhi: Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan and his Khudai Khidmatgars followed Gandhian principles when fighting the British. However, their fight was mainly for the reunification of the North West Frontier Province with Afghanistan and had little to do with the national movement.

Subhash Chandra Bose and the INA: Subhash Chandra Bose established contact with Nazi Germany through the Kabul office of Siemens Company. He did not really get along with Hitler who refused to delete a few bits from his Mein Kampf which Bose considered insulting to Indians. Bose then went to Japan and Singapore and took over leadership of the INA. “Relations between the INA and the Japanese were appalling. The Japanese regarded the INA troops as turncoats, inherently untrustworthy and cowardly. At best they were a propaganda unit for spreading pro-Japanese stories among Indians and at worst as coolie corps.” The INA was not particularly effective and Subhash Chandra Bose himself was regarded by the Japanese as “incompetent and stubborn”. Misra says that this view was not totally unjustified since Bose kept insisting that a march on Delhi was possible in the midst of a catastrophic retreat.

Allied Army atrocities: During the Second World War, the enormous allied army in Eastern India misbehaved. There were many cases of rape, arson and looting.

Gandhi’s approval for Indira Gandhi’s marriage: Indira Gandhi’s marriage to the Parsi Feroze Gandhi was controversial. Mahatma Gandhi gave his approval, but said that the marriage should be celibate.

Movie Review: Gh-aaa-jini - The Tale in 15 Minutes

thedeskjockey — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 04:01:05 EST

I've got a splitting headache...no no, it isn't the 2 glasses of wine or the Himesh Reshammiya album that I listened to. It probably is the jarring crescendo everytime Aamir Khan's socket popping eyes appear on screen...every 15 minutes. I mean thats a hard life isn't it? Here we are, trying to live down our past and forget that time when we left our zip open in front of that gal we were trying to impress...or the time when we got drunk in the office party and puked on the dance floor...sheesh, I'd like to sign up for that anterobabblefrothgulpgulpgrade amnesia please. The things I usually do in life are not worth remembering 15 minutes later anyway.

Not the case for Mr. Sanjay Singhania though. He runs a business empire, falls in love with sickly sweet common girl named Kalpana (can't resist the "agar tum Kalpana ki chaddi pehnoge..." PJs) who can do no sin which, apparently what her real name means, and gets socked on the head because no-sin girl pokes her nose in titular bad-guy's dirty business. And then he goes on a killing spree to get to bad guy, rebooting every 15 minutes like an old laptop with an irritating virus. And that essentially is the gist of the story...which looks and sounds like any old Sunny Deol movie we've seen minus all the cockroach stomping dancing and plus a new medical term for us to remember (apart from Tendulkar's tennis elbow and Rajesh Khanna's lymphosarcoma of the intestine) and a finely rippled Aamir who looks like he also took a dose of steroids every 15 minutes apart from the numerous polaroids and notes.

There is something to be said about the whole saga though. I mean we don't get a lot of movies titled after the bad guy. Kill Bill was one such movie where Mr. Bill lives upto the hype when he finally appears on screen. Ghajini, by the by, I thought initially meant elephant...you know like to remind us of the elephant in the room when no-sin and crazy-tycoon were doing their frolicking. But it apparently comes with an incredible back story (thankfully, not part of the movie) with an unexpected twist on a name...but I digress. Mr. Ghajini, though, ain't no Bill. He is the hackneyed Bihari/Haryanvi goonda with "terror-inducing" lines like "Aaee Saale, main tuhje khatam kar dunga", which actually is less scary than watching Aamir Khan scream. He is also rather inexplicably, the head of a pharmaceutical company. This may be the first time when we have seen the effects of recession been shown on screen with the head of a company supplementing his income by human trafficking.

The one effect of this, that lasts longer than 15 minutes is the feeling that this is not an Aamir Khan movie. The finesse and class associated with his previous movies is just not there. It feels more like a huge ego trip for the actor where he matches the other Khans in body and the Deols in brute force.

And caught in the middle is poor ol' me...looking for a Disprin, which ironically claims to cure this headache in...wait for it....15 minutes.

Movie Review: Ghajini

Aaman Lamba — Wed, 24 Dec 2008 23:21:41 EST

Directors remaking their own films is not a new phenomenon. Michael Haneke remade Funny Games, Robert Rodriguez converted El Mariachi to Desperado, the Ju-on franchise seems to have entered cookie-cutter mode, Alfred Hitchcock recreated The Man Who Knew Too Much, and long ago, Cecil B deMille took another take at the Ten Commandments. This is often to reach a different audience, as with Haneke's remake that was directed to American viewers. It could also be because the director feels the original material was flawed in some way, and is looking for a do-over. Often, the director has matured in his career, and the later version can be compared with the earlier, but only as if were by another person.

The motivations for the Hindi remake of Ghajini by A.R. Murgadoss are perhaps to extend the dramatic success of his Tamil version to the Hindi audience. He neglects, however, to translate Tamil film sensibilities to those one might expect from a Hindi Bollywood thriller. This is acceptable when a film is dubbed, as with Roja. It creates a dissonance for viewers in the present case, however, as we have over-the-top villains, extreme close-up photography, and an unrelenting assault of violence which does not significantly extend the plot.

There is added slickness in the lead character's role, as Aamir reprises the role portrayed by Surya in the Tamil version, yet, he pushes the film too far in his own direction, making the roles of the complementary characters more props than in the original. Despite Asin playing the same role as before, she is somehow less able to portray the model, first uplifted into a high profile romance with a suave telecom entrepreneur, and then wannabe whistleblower. The larger-than-life villain, Ghajini, played by Pradeep Singh Rawat, with his band of henchmen, corrupt corporate practices, and cliched one-liners, is more able to fill his white shoes (and the screen). The inexplicable transformation of the entrepreneur to Max Payne must be put down to the magic of the camera, which makes simple employees of Punjab Power win Bollywood dance competitions.

The other thing about the film that's over-the-top is the publicity. Aamir Khan seems to have taken earlier criticism of downbeat promotions to heart. This time he spares no channel in his assault on the viewer's senses, from posters to hairdressers. This should help juice initial returns, but viewers are not likely to return, and once they give away the only ending the film has, the rush might slow to a trickle.

Perhaps, the director might be then inspired to remake another of his potboiler thrillers.

19 Varieties of Gazelle: Poems of the Middle East by Naomi Shihab Nye

Vivek Sharma — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 02:03:31 EST

Naomi Shihab Nye's collection contains sixty poems about Palestinians and Middle East, about love and longing for lost and imaginary homelands. The poems are fragrant with spices of the Middle-East, flavors of figs and olives, and served with a tenderness of a grandmother talking to a grandchild, a five year old to his mother, an aged man to his beloved he unites with after a lifetime.

In the world torn by religious and political conflicts, these poems represent an oasis of hope. It is the humanity of these verses, that leaps from the page like the memory of nineteen varieties of gazelle described in the title poem.

The poems assume special significance in the context of post-September 11 world, for they contain a platter of understanding and taste served to assuage our need to be comforted. The solace is brought in by the mint green language of a poet born to a Palestinian father and an American mother. Perhaps the unique identity of Nye offers her perspectives about the Arab East and American West which her creativity has shaped into a narrative that offers respite from the reactionary rhetoric that dominates our daily thinking and actions.

As an Indian residing in America, I sense a brotherhood with Nye's characters, who chase the voices, flavors, visions, music and familiarity that maps their nostalgic world. As a poet with Indian heart and Americanized mind, I find Nye, like Agha Shahid Ali, present our cultural and emotional duality in a lyric that is both powerful and poignant. The tapestry of inheritance of the East is laced with tales quite unknown in the West, and this wealth can nourish many a chasms that exist between the material and spiritual. It is voices like Amichai's and Nye's that remind us that the transcendental humanity within us can help us to outlive the wounds inflicted by the fanatic forces everywhere.

Chick Lit

IdeaSmith — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 10:21:51 EST

My new literary obsession is Chick Lit. Helen Fielding, Sophie Kinsella and Marian Keyes keep me in chocolate-box mood while Meera Syal and Advaita Kala add the desi tadka. Why, even fellow-blogger/'I-know-this-girl-friend-acquaintance' Compulsive Confessor flashes her characteristic grin at me from my bedside bookstack.

I found this rather interesting piece on the internet, describing Chick Lit:

"Chick lit" is a term used to denote genre fiction written for and marketed to young women, especially single, working women in their twenties and thirties.

Now, I know I'm doing an about-face, especially after such rabid commmentary. I'm coming to this acceptance with much prior reluctance. I still have trouble accepting the term 'chick' to describe me or any woman I know. It's degrading. However, I'm willing to lay down my shackles and admit that I've been reading (and enjoying) the genre called Chick Lit.

Chick Lit is the new Romance Novel. And it isn't. As a genre it certainly is finding as much favour and spawning as many writers (and books) as the ubiquitous M&Bs. On the other hand, one may argue that romantic fiction was a genre built on common women's fantasies while Chick Lit inter-twines what we consider our ideal life along with the proverbial gang-cribbing that each of us indulges in with our galpals over men, weight loss problems, career concerns and PMS.

Chick Lit, as most of the definitions state, is usually about twenty-something women, career-minded or not, married or not, successful or not. One thing they all are, is discontent with their lot. The careerwoman struggles with loneliness and jerky boyfriends, the beauty queen is slapped around and paraded as a sex toy/trophy partner and the housewife is wistful about missed opportunities. The Chick Lit heroine is Superwoman who survives on a steady dose of gal/pal advice, gay friends, alcohol-and-career swings and roller-coaster relationships. Friends are family, chocolate is the manna for all evils and the root of all evils can be summed up into one word - MEN.

Bosses, colleagues, friends, lovers, ex-boyfriends, flings, husbands of friends, partner's buddies, friends' partners, gardeners, milkmen, grumpy old men, uncles, teachers, fathers, cheery grocers, lecherous neighbors....men in every possible shape, size and relationship are examined back and forth. It is the Chick Lit'ter's favorite hobby - Men.

If the Indian versions are different, it is only in that they're usually set in Mumbai/Delhi instead of London/New York. The protagonists gorge on chicken tikkas and grab their capuccinos from Barista instead of M&S or Starbucks. Their mothers want to see them 'well-settled' instead of 'settled down'. The men are just as committment-phobic, the careers just as unsatisfying, their bosses are just as demanding, their married neighbors consider them just as flighty and sluttish and their credit card bills are equally long.

Why do I like the genre so much? Simple. Because it is about me. That's my life, my friends, my mistakes and my victories that are getting written about. Every page brings a, "Don't I know it!", an "Aha! You got 'im there, girl!" and a "Bullshit, I heard the same thing from my second boyfriend when he was cheating on me." It's almost like having a new set of friends with every book.

You might even say it's the modern, literary woman's Soap Opera in a book format. If the women of yore wanted fantasy to keep them entertained, at least this I can say for my generation - we're thriving on reality...or some warped version of it. Who needs a perfect fairytale when our own messed-up, vodka-spiked, overstressed lives are so much more interesting?

Chick Lit is empowering in a very strange way. It tells me that other women are having a hell of it too. That having a zero social life at twenty, in favour of slogging away at work was not a mistake. That getting married at twenty-three would not have spelt 'happily ever after' either. That my smug married, whiz-in-the-kitchen housewife friend acts superior to me but also thinks I'm living the glamourous, carefree life she only reads about in magazines.

It tells me that it's okay to not feel diva-like at all times, to nurse worries over weight gain and cellulite. That it's even okay to worry more about these than a missed deadline. That bad temper, unreasonableness and pukey-head-feeling are permissible once a month.

Chick Lit tells me life isn't perfect (yes, I know someone said that long ago but catch me listening?). I mean look at the titles - The Undomestic Goddess, Life isn't all Hahaheehee, Shopaholic, Almost Single. It also tells me that each of us is figuring out a new way of perfect. And who knows? Maybe Perfect will be the way I do it - My perfect!

Book Review: Maria Misra's Business, Race, and Politics in British India

Vinod Joseph — Fri, 19 Dec 2008 01:01:58 EST

I came across this wonderful book while trying to learn a little bit more about managing agency houses which dominated Indian industry prior to independence and for a brief while after that. I heard the term ‘managing agency’ for the first time over 12 years ago while attending corporate law lectures as a law student in Bangalore. ‘Managing agency contracts,’ our highly respected professor told us with uncharacteristic brevity, ‘are banned. BANNED. Companies are not allowed to enter into such contracts any more.’

His eyes conveyed a sense of horror as if managing agency contracts were something very disgusting and dirty, akin to may be the slave trade, as if he could never explain to us youngsters, how horrible a managing agency arrangement was. We students left it at that, not particularly wanting to inquire into something not very relevant for us and add to our workload.

The second time I came across the term managing agency house was when I read Vikram Seth’s A Suitable Boy, the best book about India I have read so far. One of the characters in the book, snooty anglophile Arun Mehra works for a managing agency house. Seth takes some trouble to explain to the reader how a managing agency house functioned and how elitist and exclusive it was, even after India’s independence. However, even Seth does not manage to explain how managing agency houses dominated Indian industry during the British era. Maria Misra manages to do what neither my professor nor Vikram Seth could do (to be honest, they didn’t try to do so), that is, to convey to her readers an image of British India dominated by managing agency houses.

To explain in simplistic terms, a managing agency was a partnership which carried on the business of managing other business enterprises. A typical managing agency would enter into contracts with various companies for managing them. Under Indian company law, as it existed then, shareholders of a company could not challenge or override such contracts, even if they were contrary to shareholder interests. British India was dominated by 60 or so managing agency houses which controlled and managed most Indian businesses.

The usual modus operandi for managing agency houses was to start an enterprise with their capital, execute a managing agency contract with it for a term of twenty or thirty years and then issue shares in the company to investors, who would be stuck with the managing agent. These agencies were run by British businessmen, both English and Scottish, who believed in the racial superiority of the British over Indians, who epitomised the values around which the Empire was built and the ‘white man’s burden’ was discharged. Much more conservative than even the British Indian government, they were at the zenith of their dominance before the beginning of the First World War.

Misra explains in detail how these managing agency houses refused to change with the times and eventually lost out to multinational and Indian owned firms. Misra’s book is crowded with statistics. Misra tells us that senior assistants at these managing agency houses made INR. 3,500 per month, a huge amount of money for those days. Partners would typically retire with a fortune of around £60,000, whilst senior assistants could squirrel away an average of £30,000. Managing agencies paid their employees more than what the Indian Civil Service paid. The managing agents believed that the ideal businessman was a generalist, who would not be too ‘technical’ and who could take a holistic view of the business and its prospects. Technical people were distrusted.

As technology advanced, managing agents began to lose out on account of their technical incompetence. Misra gives us the example of Gillander, a leading managing agency, ordering railway engine paint which wouldn’t dry in the Indian climate for Duco Paints (an ICI subsidiary). Prudential, an MNC fired its managing agent since it did not understand the insurance business.

Managing agencies had so much contempt for Indians and their lack of ‘character’ that they refused to Indianise even after the Indian Civil Service started to do so. Few Indians were said to have the ‘character’ required to be a manager, with the exception of the Parsis. Indians were said to make good accountants and their rote learning skills gave them an unfair advantage in academic exams, though it was not of much use in real business. Frank Russell, a Calcutta businessman, took the view that Hindus had more brains that Muslims, but did not compare in character or physical courage. N. Macleod, a business witness to the 1913 Public Services Commission said that ‘instead of choosing men who are merely a bundle of bones and book-learning, the selectors should give preference to those men whose physical stature and appearance who be in keeping with the dignified and important position they are likely to be called on to fill in India. There is after all in the administration of Eastern countries, a great deal to be said for the man who looks the part.’

When an Indian businessman by the name Birla invited Basil Eddis of Gillander to join the Board of one of his cotton mills, the offer was coolly declined. When another Indian business house by the name Tata invited Gillander to collaborate with it in the production of steel, the offer was turned down. Misra’s book is filled with interesting anecdotes such as these. The most interesting aspect of the entire managing agency business was that managing agency contracts were void under English law whilst they were enforceable in India – until 1970.

Movie Review: Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi

Nishit — Thu, 18 Dec 2008 08:44:54 EST

There is a sense of irony with Shahrukh Khan. You, as a director, can't let Shahrukh Khan be "Shahrukh Khan" if you want to extract performance from him. "Shahrukh Khan" can be all mushy. He can sulk for the whole movie if you want him to. He can flow through the role easily. and that's the Shahrukh people flood the theatres to watch, but that's the "Shahrukh" we are tired of watching, because practically there is no difference between Raj of DDLJ, Rahul of Dil to Pagal hai or Aman of Kal Ho Naa Ho. On the other hand, if you are adept at it, you can get Mohan Bhargava (Swades) or Amjad Ali Khan(Hey Ram) out of him, but with the exception of Chak De India that doesn't go too well with boxoffice. So Aditya Chopra, after 8 long years of deliberation, probably decided to have his cake and eat it too.

Surinder (Shahrukh Khan) is your typical first-bench-sitting, specs-wearing, dull topper, who is now working with Punjab Power. You can't help but smirk when he picks up the phone to greet "Punjab Power. Lighting up your lives" where as a matter of fact, he himself could do with some lighting up himself or how suitable the headline of the newspaper "Living in the fear" applies to him. He knows affection for sure, but does not know what love is as he has not even talked to any "ladies" in his life. He works hard to make life easy for his reluctant wife Taani, who has been through series of accidents in no time. You feel for Surinder or Suri's sincerity and honesty, even his little gestures of affection. He is the underdog you want to win, but that's clearly not what his wife desires.

Enter Raj. He is combination of all the previous Shahrukh Khans you have seen in your life what with "Raj... naam to suna hoga" and all those hand-swooshing gestures. He is someone who is meant to sweep-the-girl-off-her-feet, but you fail to understand whether he is himself or parody of himself. As the movie unfolds, I found myself asking the same question which the little annoying girl next to me kept asking to her parents through out the movie, "kya ho gaya?" and by the end of the movie, you, as audience, have lost the sense of the purpose, you no longer know what you actually want to happen with mess that has been created or rather you no longer care. As most of the characters in the movie do, you leave rest of the things to the Rab(God) to solve.

You fail to go along with the character of Shahrukh Khan. He begins with good intension of just making her happy, but it's incomprehensible as to how he expects Taani to love her husband when in fact Raj is doing all the work. Also the ease with which Suri fits into the character of Raj leaves you wondering what would be the befitting word? Schizophrenic or alter-ego or masochistic? Parodying themselves seems to be the flavour of the season for YRF and SRK. First Om Shanti Om, then Dostana, now this. Sure it's funny when Raj hums the tune of Dhoom or Taani does a John Abraham, but they are on the verge of overdoing it. Although to the credit of Aditya Chopra no hariyale khet, sarson da saag, makke di roti for this one. Thanks for that!!

Shahrukh Khan proves he is, for good or for bad, as the cliche goes, "director's actor". Otherwise how do you explain a perfectly restrained and lovable portrayal of Surinder and at the same time straight-from-previous-movies, annoying, repetitive portrayal of Raj in the same movie? Anushka Sharma almost fits the mould of a YRF heroine. Vinay Pathak as Bobby Khosla is decent as over-the-top-fashion sidekick of Suri.

If this is what Aditya Chopra came out of exile for after eight years, he better go back to it again.

Slumdog Millionaire Nominated for Best Picture at Golden Globes

smallsquirrel — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 17:35:11 EST

I realize that the film Slumdog Millionaire has not been released world-wide yet, so I will try not to divulge too much in this piece. But I warn you now, there are bound to be spoilers, so if you're going to get angry about learning about plot twists and such, stop reading now.

Directed by Danny Boyle (of Trainspotting and 28 Days Later fame) and based on a book by Vikas Swaroop, this film is set in present day Mumbai and follows one Jamal Malik through a series of life events that truly could only happen in India.

To call this film brilliant would be both an understatement and taking the easy road. This is a complicated film. And although a lot of people are watching it and praising it, I am not sure they GET it.

Jamal is your average slum-dwelling Mumbaiker. His childhood is fraught with things children should not have to think about or endure. He eventually becomes a street kid, along with his brother and a girl named Latika, and the three of them struggle to make life work. The movie focuses on what happens to all three of them as life goes on.

I will be honest with you. I watched this movie on Thanksgiving weekend, smack in the middle of the Mumbai "situation". I thought it would do both my husband and I to go and see a movie about Mumbai in better times. Whoa. Bad call. Honestly, 30 minutes into the movie, both of us were in tears and struggling to stay in our seats. Brilliant does not always translate into easy to stomach, and we had already maxed out on human suffering and the depravity that some people can sink to.

The issue for us was that the film pinpoints (and then focuses on) many of the negative aspects one can find in India, including: extreme poverty, religious violence, police brutality, exploitation of children, organized crime, violence against women, violence against children, torture, rape, coercion, caste issues, and the list goes on.

What the film doesn't do is highlight the positive aspect of India. Which is fine. This is meant to be one story, and is not responsible for representing the full picture of India. However, when seeing only the negative, it all becomes overwhelming. A bit raw. And this seems to be the bit that is sticking with many non-desis that I have talked to.

"Is India really like that?"
"Did you see any of that?"
"Oh my GOD how did you cope?"

Well, yes and no. Yes. And the answer is not that easy. I saw it but I did not experience it. And as most of us know, while India can be raw and horrifying and all the negative things I mentioned above do happen in India. But it certainly is not the complete picture. India has so much beauty, history, love, warmth, compassion. But this is not a story about those things. And that is alright.

This film has to be among the best-made films I have ever seen. Boyle did not attempt to get any licenses to film in Mumbai, and so many scenes in the film are shot "guerrilla" style. There is even a shot of a real cop telling them to stop filming which has been left in.

It is also an interesting marriage of styles. Boyle is a Brit, but much of the dialog is in Hindi. The soundtrack is by film music giant A.R. Rahman, and much of the cast and crew for production are local Mumbaikers.

None of the leads are very well known. The guy who plays Jamal is Dev Patel who is on a British serial. His brother Salim is played by Madhur Mittal, who has been in some other Bollywood movies, but is not really well known either. And the woman who plays Latika used to be a model. Of course, there are some big names in the supporting cast such as Irrfan Khan and Anil Kapoor.

I would highly recommend this film to everyone. Just do not go to it thinking you're going to get some happy, joyful, feel-good movie. It is a slice of one life, somewhat disturbing, but ending with a message that I think we can all get behind. Oh, and one very tongue-in-cheek nod to a typical Bollywood dance number.