मेघदूत: "नीचैर्गच्छत्युपरि च दशा चक्रनेमिक्रमेण"

समर्थ शिष्या अक्का : "स्वामीच्या कृपाप्रसादे हे सर्व नश्वर आहे असे समजले. पण या नश्वरात तमाशा बहुत आहे."

G C Lichtenberg: “It is as if our languages were confounded: when we want a thought, they bring us a word; when we ask for a word, they give us a dash; and when we expect a dash, there comes a piece of bawdy.”

C. P. Cavafy: "I’d rather look at things than speak about them."

Martin Amis: “Gogol is funny, Tolstoy in his merciless clarity is funny, and Dostoyevsky, funnily enough, is very funny indeed; moreover, the final generation of Russian literature, before it was destroyed by Lenin and Stalin, remained emphatically comic — Bunin, Bely, Bulgakov, Zamyatin. The novel is comic because life is comic (until the inevitable tragedy of the fifth act);...”

सदानंद रेगे: "... पण तुकारामाची गाथा ज्या धुंदीनं आजपर्यंत वाचली जात होती ती धुंदी माझ्याकडे नाहीय. ती मला येऊच शकत नाही याचं कारण स्वभावतःच मी नास्तिक आहे."

".. त्यामुळं आपण त्या दारिद्र्याच्या अनुभवापलीकडे जाऊच शकत नाही. तुम्ही जर अलीकडची सगळी पुस्तके पाहिलीत...तर त्यांच्यामध्ये त्याच्याखेरीज दुसरं काही नाहीच आहे. म्हणजे माणसांच्या नात्यानात्यांतील जी सूक्ष्मता आहे ती क्वचित चितारलेली तुम्हाला दिसेल. कारण हा जो अनुभव आहे... आपले जे अनुभव आहेत ते ढोबळ प्रकारचे आहेत....."

Kenneth Goldsmith: "In 1969 the conceptual artist Douglas Huebler wrote, “The world is full of objects, more or less interesting; I do not wish to add any more.”1 I’ve come to embrace Huebler’s ideas, though it might be retooled as “The world is full of texts, more or less interesting; I do not wish to add any more.” It seems an appropriate response to a new condition in writing today: faced with an unprecedented amount of available text, the problem is not needing to write more of it; instead, we must learn to negotiate the vast quantity that exists. How I make my way through this thicket of information—how I manage it, how I parse it, how I organize and distribute it—is what distinguishes my writing from yours."

Tom Wolfe: "The first line of the doctors’ Hippocratic oath is ‘First, do no harm.’ And I think for the writers it would be: ‘First, entertain.’"

विलास सारंग: "… इ. स. 1000 नंतर ज्या प्रकारची संस्कृती रुढ झाली , त्यामध्ये साधारणत्व व विश्वात्मकता हे गुण प्राय: लुप्त झाले...आपली संस्कृती अकाली विश्वात्मक साधारणतेला मुकली आहे."

Saturday, January 23, 2010

Heaven can't Wait!

I read a few Puranas, in Marathi, in my childhood. There is fair amount of sex in them. I feel it contributed to their attraction. Particularly whenever Lord Indra makes an appearance.(Read my earlier post on Chandoba, a Marathi magazine for children.)

Wikipedia says: "In Puranic mythology, Indra is amorous character at times...". I think lecherous would be a fitter word.

I often thought that Indra probably looked like Hindi film actor Premnath of Johny Mera Naam fame! Poor Ahalya. She was turned to stone while the seducer got away lightly by becoming 'Thousand Eyed'.

I still remember the night I watched Warren Beatty's "Heaven Can Wait" , at the open air theatre of IIT, Madras and James Mason's words describing what it meant to be dead.

I really enjoyed it. (Frankly even an ordinary movie became watchable at OAT because if not film-stars you could always watch real stars!)

Since then I have watched a few more movies of Mr. Beatty. Most of them are likeable. However during the same period I have read more about his ability to bed women rather than his work in cinema. Contrast that with Clint Eastwood who has scaled great cinematic heights with the passage of years.

In a review of "STAR/ How Warren Beatty Seduced America" By Peter Biskind Guardian Jan 10 2010 Euan Ferguson writes:

"...Warren Beatty has, according to this long-awaited semi-authorised biography, bedded almost 13,000 women in his life...

...Seduction was his greatest asset. Once he was interested in a woman, he would never let go. He enveloped her with his every thought. He wanted total control of her; her hair, her make up, her work. He took notice of everything...Charm he certainly had, and many who shared his bed stress this to Biskind. But there was also a driving need for complete control, which may have got them weak-kneed in the first place.."

Read again.

"...He enveloped her with his every thought. He wanted total control of her; her hair, her make up, her work. He took notice of everything...But there was also a driving need for complete control, which may have got them weak-kneed in the first place.."

Some of the sexiest scenes in Indian films were shot on Nargis and Raj Kapoor. There was almost no nudity, no kissing but, for my taste, the pair made virtual love on the screen.

Was Mr. Raj Kapoor like Mr. Beatty in some respects? Dev Anand?

No other name from Hindi film world comes to my mind.

Only the women in their lives- and there were quite a few!- could answer.

As for Indra, he would like to have a closer look at Mr. Beatty's anatomy if and when he reaches heaven.

Heaven can't wait!


Artist: Warren Miller, The New Yorker, March 22 1976
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)